PUBLIC HEARING SUMMARY LAKE SHORE DRIVE SANITARY SEWER PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT (PER) TOWN OF LONG BEACH, INDIANA SANITARY DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN CITY, INDIANA
I. Call to Order and Opening Remarks
This meeting was a virtual meeting held via Zoom. A link to the meeting video is below: https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/WyeauAee7rFqxIrTcjo5p8Vv21bAZER5PMH0JfonM7xt3LT7Dkwubz Kky8JAGxDV.1nLNlCiZsONxHSL8 Mr. Michael Kuss introduced himself as the person that would lead the meeting. He read some opening remarks that included:
1. This is a Public Hearing for the Presentation of the Lake Shore Drive Sanitary Sewer Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) for Long Beach Indiana and for receiving comments and questions from the public about it.
2. He thanked everyone that joined the Hearing for their participation. A listing of everyone that attended the Virtual Meeting is provided in Attachment No. 1.
3. He introduced the Panelists: a. Robert LeMay, Town Council President, Town of Long Beach b. John Wall, Town Council Member, Town of Long Beach c. John Kocher, Town Council Member, Town of Long Beach d. Nick Meyer, Town Council Member, Town of Long Beach e. Mary Lou McFadden, Town Council Member, Town of Long Beach f. Joy Schmitt, Former Town Council Member, and current Building Commission Member, Town of Long Beach g. Christopher L. Willoughby, Attorney, Braje, Nelson & Janes, LLP, representing the Town of Long Beach h. Frank Harris, Commissioner, Michigan City Sanitary District i. Jeff Wright, City Engineer, City of Michigan City and Commissioner, MCSD j. Jim Meyer, Attorney, James Meyer & Associates, PC, representing the MCSD k. Karl Cender, Accountant, Cender & Company, LLC l. Jim Maurer, P.E., Haas &Associates. Jim is they lead Design Engineer on this Project. 4. He explained that Jim Maurer will be leading the discussion along with input from Karl Cender on financial information. Other panelists may interject information as necessary. 5. He explained that all Comments/ Questions will be held until after the presentation by the engineer, accountant, and the other panelists. All attendees will be muted until the time for Comments/ Questions The order we will follow for receiving questions and comments will be:
1
a. First, we will read all Comments/Questions that were received via email and we will provide answers as appropriate. b. Then we will listen to Comments/Questions from individuals that have indicated that they want to speak via Zoom and we will provide answers as appropriate. c. Then we will allow anyone else to Comment or ask Questions via Zoom or via phone and we will provide answers as appropriate. d. We will only be able to provide answers during this Hearing, to questions that can be quickly answered. More detailed answers or answers that are unknown at the time of the Hearing will be researched and such answers will be provided in the Public Hearing Summary submitted to IDEM and this Summary will be made available to the Public. e. All speakers need to give their name and address before making a comment or asking a question. f. Since this meeting is being recorded, please speak loudly and distinctly and do not speak over each other.
Mr. Jim Maurer then presented on the following information, except that Mr. Karl Cender presented on Section H. Please refer to the attached Meeting Agenda for more detailed information:
II. Summary of PER
A. PROJECT PURPOSE Mr. Maurer explained that as a result of the current LaPorte County Health Department moratorium on septic systems the PER analyzed sanitary sewer alternatives for Lake Shore Drive and determined and recommended the best overall sanitary sewer alternative to implement.
B. PROJECT LOCATIONS Mr. Maurer described the Sanitary Sewer locations and the Project Service Area.
C. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ROUTE DESCRIPTION Mr. Maurer explained the Lake Shore Drive street right-of-way for sanitary sewers and 2 wastewater pump stations and force mains and Moore Road street right-of-way for 1 wastewater lift station and force main.
D. SANITARY SEWER ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED IN PER Mr. Maurer described ALT 1 – Pressure Sanitary Sewer with Grinder Pumps; and ALTS 2 and 3 – Gravity Sanitary Sewer, Lift Stations and Force Mains. He provided specifics about each alternative and provided cost estimates for each alternative. See the attached Meeting Agenda for more detailed information.
E. SANITARY SEWER ALTERNATIVES DISMISSED IN PER Mr. Maurer explained that the NO ACTION alternative was dismissed without any analysis due to the septic system moratorium, and the VACUUM SANITARY SEWER WITH A VACUUM VALVE FOR EACH PROPERTY alternative was dismissed without detailed analysis because of the size of the vacuum station buildings required and other factors.
2
F. 20 YEAR COST-EFFECTIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
Mr. Maurer explained that the required standard 20-year cost-effective analysis of ALTS 1, 2 and 3, is presented in PER Table No. 4B.
G. SELECTED SANITARY SEWER ALTERNATIVE Mr. Maurer explained that based on the analysis of alternatives, ALT. 3 is the Selected Alternative.
H. USER COSTS FOR SELECTED SANITARY SEWER ALTERNATIVE Mr. Maurer explained that: the user costs for the selected sanitary sewer were determined by the MCSD Financial Consultant, Cender & Company. This financial analysis is included in PER Exhibit 15; Long Beach Town Council Resolution which adopted the financial analysis of Cender & Company to determine the average user cost for the Selected Alternative sanitary sewer; and that the determination of the average user cost for the Selected Alternative sanitary sewer was based on all developed properties on LSD receiving sanitary sewer service and all these property owners paying the debt service for the project SRF loan, regardless of whether or not they connect to the sanitary sewer. Mr. Maurer also explained that only those property owners who connect to the sanitary sewer will also have to pay the MCSD sewer usage costs, based on the MCSD rate schedule for areas outside of Michigan City. Mr. Cender explained that the using the average usage of 700 cu.ft. per month the average usage fee would be $37.29/mo. and that the capital cost would be $127.76 per mo. Mr. Kuss added that the average user fee is based on a 5/8-inch water meter and that there is a minimum fee based on 300 cu.ft. per month and for a 5/8 inches meter this amount is $24.97/mo, and if the home has a large water meter the base user fee is higher. Mr. Kuss also explained that a copy of the current user fees can be provided.
Mr. Cender also explained that only those property owners who connect to the sanitary sewer will also have to pay the MCSD sewer usage costs, based on the MCSD rate schedule for areas outside of Michigan City. See the attached Meeting Agenda, Exhibit F of the Per, for more information.
I. POTABLE WATER SERVICE LINE REPLACEMENTS Mr. Maurer explained that the replacement of 130 existing potable water service lines on LSD can be included in the project provided that the costs are paid for by other funds and not by the SRF loan for the sanitary sewer project.
3
J. SELECTED SANITARY SEWER ALTERNATIVE IN A POSSIBLE FUTURE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM FOR THE ENTIRE TOWN OF LONG BEACH Mr. Maurer explained that at the request of the MCSD, the PER considered how the Selected Alternative Sanitary Sewer would fit into a possible future sanitary sewer system for the entire Town of Long Beach. The PER Exhibit 3 map which follows, indicates the results of this consideration.
K. OTHER COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES Mr. Maurer explained In addition to costs, sanitary sewer ALTS 1, 2 and 3 were also compared in the PER on the following basis; (1) technical, (2) reliability, (3) implementability and (4) environmental. The environmental comparison of alternatives consisted of impacts on the following; (a) disturbed/undisturbed land, (b) historic/architectural resources, (c) wetland, (d) surface waters, (e) groundwater, (f) 100- year floodplain, (g) plant and animals, (h) prime farmland, (i) air quality, (j) open space and recreational opportunities, (k) Lake Michigan Coastal Management Zone, (l) National Natural Landmarks and also the environmental mitigation measures required for the construction of each alternative. As the three sanitary sewer alternatives are each underground sewer main and service line projects, they all compare closely on the preceding items.
L. PROJECT AGREEMENT BETWEEN TOWN OF LONG BEACH AND MICHIGAN CITY SANITARY DISTRICT Mr. Maurer explained that a project agreement between the Town of Long Beach and the Michigan City Sanitary District (MCSD) is included in the PER as Exhibit 12. The Agreement covers the funding, design, construction, operation and maintenance of the project facilities and monthly billing, all of which shall be the responsibility of the MCSD. The Town shall assist the MCSD in collecting any unpaid sewer bills. See the attached Meeting Agenda for more detailed information.
III. RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS ALREADY RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC
The written correspondence received are contained in Attachment No. 2.
Mr. Maurer summarized responses to the written correspondence already received.
Mr. Kuss read nine more written comments/questions and no responses were provided during the Hearing to these.
Written responses to all written correspondence are provide in Attachment No. 3.
4
IV. COMMENTS, QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. Kuss read written questions and comments made during the Hearing via the Zoom question dialog box, and responses were provided during the hearing. These questions, comments, and responses are presented in Attachment No. 4, Questions/Comments 1 through 63.
Mr. Kuss then allowed people to express verbal comments: These questions, comments, and responses are also presented in Attachment No. 4, Questions/Comments 64 through 67.
V. FURTHER WRITTEN COMMENTS
Mr. Maurer explained that individuals can submit written response for up to five days after the Hearing. Any such Questions and Comments received are contained in Attachment No. 2.
VI. PUBLIC HEARING SUMMARY REVIEW
Mr. Maurer explained that a summary of the meeting a written record of the questions, comments, and responses will be included and made available to the public. VII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Kuss thanked everyone for attending and adjourned the Hearing.
5
ATTACHMENT 1 - Attendee Report
Topic Webinar ID Long Beach Sewers Public Hearing
Panelist Details User Name (Original Name) Email 1 John Kocher [email protected] 2 Christopher L. Willoughby [email protected] 3 Jim Meyer [email protected] 4 Jim Maurer [email protected] 5 Robert LeMay [email protected] 6 John Wall [email protected] 7 Jeff Wright [email protected] 8 Karl Cender [email protected] 9 Nick Meyer [email protected] 10 Mary Lou McFadden [email protected] 11 Joy Schmitt [email protected] 12 Michael Kuss [email protected]
Attendee Details User Name (Original Name) First Name Last Name Email 1 Sam Duthoy Sam Duthoy [email protected] 2 Louise A Louise A [email protected] 3 mike haggerty mike haggerty [email protected] 4 Fred Fred [email protected] 5 Dave Miniat Dave Miniat [email protected] 6 long deach sewer meeting long deach sewer [email protected] 7 J. Burke J. Burke [email protected] 8 Annie Malone Annie Malone [email protected] 9 MK MK [email protected] 10 mike mike [email protected] 11 Dr. Michael Athans Dr. Michael Athans [email protected] 12 mlombard mlombard [email protected] 13 Robert Robert [email protected] 14 Joe Joe [email protected] 15 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 16 Mary Anne Lapasso Mary Anne Lapasso [email protected] 17 dg dg [email protected] 18 Brian Jensen Brian Jensen [email protected] 19 tony tony [email protected] 20 Margaret Power judithpower [email protected] 21 judithpower judithpower [email protected] 22 John Troller John Troller [email protected] 23 kateP kateP [email protected] 24 Carolyn Carolyn [email protected] 25 Gregg Hansen Gregg Hansen [email protected] 26 Vince Scannell Vince Scannell [email protected] 27 Becky Lempa Becky Lempa [email protected] 28 jkbrutus jkbrutus [email protected] 29 brock327 brock327 [email protected] 30 David Gunderson David Gunderson [email protected] 31 edgausselin edgausselin [email protected] 32 James Smith James Smith [email protected] 33 jane no sewers [email protected] 34 no sewers no sewers [email protected] 35 alan krema alan krema [email protected] 36 Doug Doug [email protected] 37 sally allen sally allen [email protected] 38 ac ac [email protected] 39 Greg Greg [email protected] 40 Andrea Lissuzzo Andrea Lissuzzo [email protected] 41 cjdempsey cjdempsey [email protected] 42 Abigail Neary Abigail Neary [email protected] 43 SAMSUNG-SM-J327V SAMSUNG-SM-J327V [email protected] 44 Don Gunderson Don Gunderson [email protected] 45 terribrady terribrady [email protected] 46 Kendra Bartlett kendra [email protected] 47 Beth Linnen Beth Linnen [email protected] 48 markoldis markoldis [email protected] 49 Mark Saas Mark Saas [email protected] 50 benoy benoy [email protected] 51 Joann Balous Joann Balous [email protected] 52 Dennis Breen Dennis Breen [email protected] 53 Dr Rizos Dr Rizos [email protected] 54 Mike Ross Mike Ross [email protected] 55 John Wall [email protected] 56 mary ann mary ann [email protected] 57 Nellie Nellie [email protected] 58 kyle kyle [email protected] 59 june salmon june salmon [email protected] 60 Horst Bauchrowitz Horst Bauchrowitz [email protected] 61 Linda Gorman Linda Gorman [email protected] 62 BILL BILL [email protected] 63 Claudia Marciniak Claudia Marciniak [email protected] 64 Tim Tim [email protected] 65 Kevin Kevin [email protected] 66 Timothy Arendt Timothy Arendt [email protected] 67 davidhoppe davidhoppe [email protected] 68 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 69 ladowdle ladowdle [email protected] 70 Sam & Kathleen Kruis Sam & Kathleen Kruis [email protected] 71 568914 568914 [email protected] 72 William Becht William Becht [email protected] 73 Tim Anderson 2961 Lake Shore TimDrive Anderson 2961 [email protected] Shore Drive 74 patty j patty j [email protected] 75 User bmartin [email protected] 76 bmartin bmartin [email protected] 77 Sharon Goodman Sharon Goodman [email protected] 78 marty marty [email protected] 79 Nancy McGeady Nancy McGeady [email protected] 80 Paulette Harnach Paulette Harnach [email protected] 81 asremijas asremijas [email protected] 82 kate mulcahy kate mulcahy [email protected] 83 Abby Neary Abby Neary [email protected] 84 Barbara Barbara [email protected] 85 Georgetta Manning Cox Georgetta Manning Cox [email protected] 86 Tom King Tom King [email protected] 87 Nicola Nicola [email protected] 88 Jack Carey Jack Carey [email protected] 89 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 90 kendra kendra [email protected] 91 Jeff Brunner Jeff Brunner [email protected] 92 Tim Tim [email protected] 93 Gregg Hansen Gregg Hansen [email protected] 94 sl sl [email protected] 95 T.J. T.J. [email protected] 96 jameslaughlin james laughlin [email protected] 97 Tony Cox Tony Cox [email protected] 98 Martha Maust Martha Maust [email protected] 99 Lenore Lenore [email protected] 100 Sarah Takash Sarah Takash [email protected] 101 Sarah Takash Sarah Takash [email protected] 102 Marcella Kunstek Marcella Kunstek [email protected] 103 Warneke Warneke [email protected] 104 Scott Scott [email protected] 105 Automated Data Automated Data [email protected] 106 Stephen Stewart Stephen Stewart [email protected] 107 Char Char [email protected] 108 Zafar Rizvi Zafar Rizvi [email protected] 109 Linda Hnatusko Linda Hnatusko [email protected] 110 Patsi Patsi [email protected] Other Attended User Name 1 12198788128 2 12198980778 3 12198724043 4 12198747039 5 12192147552 6 13129538510 7 17088604308 8 13122134017 9 13129538510 10 12192527627 11 17732185168 12 12198730828 13 16306626960 14 12198730828 15 17083074475 16 12192103826 17 18479224892 18 12192147552 19 12196170980 20 17082055100 21 12199393066 ATTACHMENT 2
WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS Michael Kuss
From: Paulette Harnach
To Whom It May Concern:
As a homeowner on the hillside of Lake Shore Drive, I would like to voice my opinion IN FAVOR of the installation of the sewer line in Long Beach. I can't wait for the project to get started.
Sincerely,
Paulette Harnach 2005 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360 [email protected]
1 Michael Kuss
From: Rosemary Rucinski
AUGUST 17, 2020
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN @ SANITARY DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN CITY, IN:
I AM IN FAVOR OF A PUBLIC SEWER LINE ON LAKE SHORE DRIVE IN LONG BEACH, IN. I LIVE FULL TIME ON (LSD) HILLSIDE@ 2009.
LOOKING FORWARD TO CONNECTING TO A PUBLIC SEWER LINE.
REGARDS,
ROSEMARY RUCINSKI 2009 LAKE SHORE DRIVE LONG BEACH, IN 46360 [email protected]
1 Michael Kuss
From: Barrett Callaghan < [email protected]> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020 12:37 PM To: LB Public Hearing Subject: Town of Long Beach - Lakeshore Drive Sanitary Sewer Proposal
Michigan City Sanitary District:
We are writing in support of the proposed plan to install sewers on Lakeshore Drive in the ?town of Long Beach, IN . With continued erosion and risk to potential exposure of existing septic tanks into Lake Michigan, time is of the essence. Thanks for your consideration.
Barrett and Susie Callaghan 2234 Lakeshjore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360
1 Michael Kuss
From: JOHN DOYLE
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is John Doyle and I reside at 2501 Lake Shore Drive in Long Beach, IN . My home is on the south side of Lake Shore Drive, and as such, under the current proposal, I will be required to contribute to paying for the installation of the main sewer line down Lake Shore Drive. I would like to express my support for the plan. I understand that I am not required to hook up to the sewer immediately, but I intend to do so.
Sincerely
John Doyle 312-547-0018 Michael Kuss
From: Doherty Lissuzzo, Andrea
Good afternoon: As a Long Beach homeowner, I am writing to express my concerns about the sewer project. It is disruptive, very expensive and unfairly burdens a segment of the community to pay for it. The town council has proceeded with plans for the sewers without sufficient transparency, so many community members are not even aware of the project. Actual bids for the work have not been obtained, or at least, not been shared with the community. Thank you for your time and interest in this issue.
Andrea Lissuzzo 7087102650
1 Michael Kuss
From: Jim Brady
I am writing to you because I want you know my thoughts on this issue. I have owned my home on Lake Shore Drive since 1994. We have never had any septic issues nor have any of my friends or relatives. The issues have been caused by 10 homes and making everyone pay for a sewer system is not the solution. These new homes were built after the Long Beach town council changed the building rules, in place forever and allowed septic to be put on the lake side of the house. Obviously a less than intelligent decision. I think the best solution would be to have the affected homes relocate the septic tanks, per the old regulations or continue to pump and hall. So I am 100% against this project and you sho uld know the council did not follow proper procedure.
James F Brady
1 Michael Kuss
From: Alain LeCoque
I'm with ya. So what do u need from me?
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 24, 2020, at 4:00PM, Jim Brady
1 Michael Kuss
From: Claudia Marciniak
I am sending this letter to all Long Beach Town Council members as well as the MC San itary Sewer Commission. Thank you.
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
1 Claudia Marciniak 2827 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360
August 24, 2020
Honorable Long Beach Town Council Members:
Dr. Robert LeMay Nick Meyer John Kocher Mary Lou McFadden John Wall
Michigan City Sanitary Sewer District:
Garry Mitchel, President, Board of Commissioners
I am expressing my concerns regarding the $7 +million bond issuance that Long Beach is going to undertake with respect to the LSD sewer project in the very near term. I consider myself a somewhat informed citizen with regards to town issues. I can't attend Town Council meetings in person since I am a second homeowner and work full time, but religiously read meeting minutes and check the website from time to time about Town Council decisions. In this era of Covid 19, I have attended a few zoom meetings when I could.
My concerns are as follows:
Awareness and Proper Notice COVID-19 has flipped everything upside down and apparently, I wasn't as diligent as I should have been given everything going on as it relates to sewers. I recently became aware ofthe sewer project and it is already approved status. I found out about this project on Next-Door, but a lot of people in Long Beach are not on Next-Door so I was one of the lucky ones.
The Town Council meeting minutes/zoom link were on posted to the Town website just before the 1 recent August 17 h meeting where the sewers were added last minute to the agenda, as was the MCSD agreement. I don't know when the meeting link was actually posted or the agreement drafts. Given that this is the largest public improvement project the Town I believe will undertake, it is unacceptable, that there was no posting of this information for MONTHS before or immediately after the decision was made. If it wasn't posted, how would the residents know of the progress or decision? This is not a budget item within the Town Council's budget- it's a major financial undertaking for not only the Town but also the homeowner's members of Lakeshore Drive for future decades. Long Beach Town Council Michigan City Sanitary District
Why is the notice regarding the MCSD public meeting on September 9th not on the Long beach website? It affects Long Beach residents, not Michigan City. Again, not proper notice and awareness.
Mr. Defuniak also indicated that he was concerned about the notice issue. Your council should be concerned. In an era ofthe pandemic, it seems like you should be going overboard with notice. A certified letter to each affected lot owner seems like it should be in order for a project such as this to ensure proper notice.
Inequitable burden/paving costs.
Lakeshore Drive is the main thoroughfare for Long Beach. The paving portion of the budget is over a million dollars. ( I can't seem to find the cost in the budget provided on the website but it was mentioned in the meeting. Why is it not clear?) It is an unequitable burden to have the LSD homeowners pay for a project that benefits the whole Town.
Cost is not known, yet homeowners have no control of the decision to move forward
I don't believe an answer was provided to the question of grants available to partially pay for this project. Dr. Lemay and no one else indicated that this issue had been researched. You are obligating up all LSD homeowners for a unknown cost which has already increased by 30% from initial estimates and is unlikely to go down from here. It's no wonder LSD homeowners are concerned as they do not have a sense of what their obligation will be and they have no control of the decision. How much is too much? A prohibitive cost increase has not been defined. There was 0% contingency that I saw in the budget which further supports my concern.
Instability of Lake Shore Drive and impact on local homeowners for the construction
The Town has taken on some projects to strengthen Lakeshore Drive from falling into the lake which I am thankful for. However, I can't believe we're looking at doing work on Lakeshore Drive when we're concerned about lake Shore Drive falling in the lake. If we have sewer lines in there and LSD is breached, we will have a pretty big environmental issue. Additionally, I understand that many homeowners are within the vicinity of where the existing Lake Shore Drive stabilization projects are going on are constantly living through blasting and vibrations. I can only imagine what ripping up Lakeshore Drive and digging in the ground will do. We have no recourse that I can see for damage to the interior of homes for construction vibrations. The Town Council seemed to brush this concern off at a prior meeting when talking about LSD stabilization projects and impacts to homeowners-- even those homeowners who were situated off LSD were affected.
Other options The septic situation of these new, few 10-15 impacted homes is unfortunate, but they do have an option. It' s called pump and haul. Further, these homes have diminished in value primarily because of lake levels and the secondarily by failing septic. Why are the mistakes of the prior Town Council for approving this inadequate septic solution and 10-15 homeowners the burden of others who didn't make foolish decisions?
2 Long Beach Town Council Michigan City Sanitary District
Yes, they will have trouble selling those homes and it's not our issue to bail them out. They made a conscious decision to buy on the lake and took a chance with a new septic system. It was a gamble that was lost.
Why can't the Town buy the impacted homes, conceivably at a dramatically reduced price and use it for add itional beach? The homeowners would be happy to get some compensations as the water laps at their foundations vs. nothing because they can't sell a house to due continued lake damage or an out of pocket cost when they have to tear down the home when they are condemned. Mother nature does not appear to be stopping its encroachment and this winter is really concerning with the possibilit y of the lake not freezing and the lake is already at or over capping existing sea walls that were recently repaired.
Prepayment of Bonds
Can the revenue bonds be prepaid? What if people want to sell their homes and need to pay-off their share of the assessment. Will there a provision within the bond documents that would allow for prepayment without a cost to the Town? If not, how do we establish an interest-bearing escrow such that upon sale, a portion ofthe sale proceeds is used to pay down the bonds in the future and ensure that gets done.
1am supportive a sewer project throughout the Town and which distributes costs in a more fair and equitable manner. Mr. Meyer took a stand and rejected the agreement, indicating that a more comprehensive approach made more sense which I agree with. The Hass Engineering plans need to be updated but there were Town wide data and plans already available to work with. A delay in the process to research the comprehensive plan appears warranted. Given the disaster of our economy, interest rates are not going up dramatically in the next year or so there is plenty of time to investigate further the broader Town wide approach. . Thank yo~for/! considering my concerns. . ;,J~i . ___ //
"../ .
3 Michael Kuss
From: Annie Malone
Hello, I have lived at 2957 LSD for 58 years, year-round for 6. I am writing to voice my opposition to the current plan for sewers on LSD. My septic system works perfectly and I am not interested in sewers. It is insane to think that only residents of LSD will pay for the project. I am a widow and looking at the numbers to hook up makes me very, very worried, especially because the project is moving ahead so quickly.The mainline will be for everyone in Long Beach, so everyone should pay. Or, ditch the sewers and have the 10 homes with failing systems, pay for their own mess. I attended many of the BZA meetings when these homeowners were seeking permits. They pushed and pushed, they filed a SLAAP order on my husband and me, I went to court trying to protect our beach , contacted LaPorte county health BUT they won. Permits granted. Now, they are in trouble and want me to pay for their greed. No way.
I wa nt to see a comprehensive plan for the entire town. We are all in this together.
Sincerely, Annie Malone 2957 LSD
1 Michael Kuss
From: Balous, Joann
Hello,
In preparation of the public hearing on sewers in Long Beach we would like to voice our opposition to the plan as proposed. We believe the Long Beach Town Council failed to perform adequate due diligence, and are not acting in the best interest of the residents of Lake Shore Drive. Our letter to the members of the Town Council is attached.
Regards,
Joann & Milo Balous 1517 Lake Shore Drive, Long Beach, IN
Th1s message (including any attachments) may conta1n conf1denlial. propnetary. priv1leged and/or private 1nformallon The 1nformat1on is intended to be for the use of the mdJvJdual or enllty des1gnated above . If you are not the Intended rec1p1ent of th1s message please nollfy the sender Immediately. and delete the message and any attachments Any disclosure reproduction d1Stnbut10n or other use of th1s message or any attachments by an individual 01 entity other than the intended recipient is prohibited
1 To the Long Beach Town Council Members,
We have reviewed the Agreement for Funding, Design, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Sanitary Sewer System and have the following comments, concerns and questions. First, let us state, we agree sewers are needed however we are vehemently against the agreement as drafted.
Specific to the Agreement for Funding, item #4, "the term costs shall include, but is not limited to, construction ofthe Project, which shall include any land acquisition costs, pump stations, improvements to infrastructure, and the stubs to be installed from the sewer main ... " . In good conscience how can the Town Council agree to an open-ended contract on behalf of the residents of Lake Shore Drive? The council is basically letting the Sanitary District or Contractor add anything to the project without regard to ultimate cost. Does the project estimate contain the " ... improvements to existing SDMC facilities that would handle the wastewater flow" referenced in the notice for the Sanitary District of Michigan City Public Hearing (Virtual)? Personally, we would never sign such a contract for proposed work without a definite price. Prior to beginning the project how can you not identify land acquisition costs? How can you not know where to position pump stations? Is that not part of the engineering report that shows where the five lift stations are to be located for the gravity system? How can you not be aware of improvements to the infrastructure? Are there known, planned improvements, or is this just for situations that reveal themselves as a result of the project? We cannot weigh the benefits to the residents of Lake Shore Drive where there are just too many unknown factors.
Speaking to the infrastructure, specifically the Lake Shore Drive road; are there currently inadequacies that should be repaired that have nothing to do with the sewers? We don't want to be responsible for current damage or repairs needed that should have been addressed but will now become part of the sewer project. For this reason, we need an independent engineering study that will assess the current state of the road. Additionally, the engineering firm should look at land needed and other improvements that aren't obvious so they can be added to the complete final cost of the project.
In the Agreement for Funding, item #6, states "Any new residences that are constructed on LSD after the completion of the Project will be subject to a graduated connection fee established by the Town for access to the public sewer. The owner of any such new residence will be required to pay all fees and costs associated with the connection to the sewer... ". Will the original investors in this project be credited accordingly as new homeowners are added and the connection fees applied to the outstanding principle (item #7)? Will the monthly payments be reduced as the principle is paid down and the cost is born by more homeowners? What is that t ime frame for applying those credits once new homeowners are added. That needs to be addressed in this contract.
In the Agreement for Funding, item #14, "The Town will have no responsibility to operate, maintain, or repair any part of the Project". How about the responsibility of the homeowners? Can the MCSD assess us for any cost after the project is completed?
During the Town Council meeting on 8/17/20 there were many reasonable comments and questions from Lake Shore Drive residents. When does the board plan to address those comments? One resident questioned whether a grant to fund the project was pursued. Dr. Lemay said grants were not investigated; do you plan to do so? Looking at the EPA website there is a Sewer Overflow & Stormwater Reuse Municipal Grants program that grants funds to the state and are then awarded to the towns/cities. We're not sure if that applies to our situation however there are many other categories of grants available. Another comment made during the meeting was the fact that Lake Shore Drive is for the benefit of all Long Beach residents. We understand the actual sewer systems are for the use and benefit of individual homeowners however the road is used by all residents and visitors for vehicle traffic, walking, jogging and biking. This portion of the costs should not be the responsibility of just the Lake Shore Drive homeowners.
In conclusion we believe sewers would benefit the entire town of Long Beach, not just Lake Shore Drive. The scope of the project should be expanded as discussed in the 8/17 meeting so the costs and benefits can ultimately be spread equally among all residents.
Respectfully,
Joann & Milo Balous 1517 Lake Shore Drive, Long Beach, IN 708.926.5435 Michael Kuss
From: Carter Elenz
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments I questions.
Comment: Homeowners are responsible for the cost of physically connecting their home to the sewer, but we do not have the experience needed to guess at what physically connecting will cost us. Complicating this for us is the wide disparity in elevation and distance between our homes and the street.
Questions: • Within the PER, is there an estimated average cost to the homeowner of connecting to the sewer? • If yes, what is the cost and how was it estimated?
Request: If there is not an estimate of a homeowners cost of making the physical connection to the sewer, would you please: • Describe in general what work needs to happen at an average home • Describe what physical variables (distance, elevation, other) make this more I less expensive and what that implies in terms of the materials (lifts, etc) needed • Provide rough guidance, rules of thumbs, etc. that might help us guess at our cost
Thank you for listening and responding to the above.
Carter Elenz 2721 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360
1 Michael Kuss
From: Carter Elenz
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments I questions.
Comment: I believe a sewer might be built that hardly anyone uses. Unless a home is required to connect, there is no motivation to connect. • Homeowners are satisfied with their septic systems so they won't feel any need for a sewer and won't see any new benefits from a sewer • Homeowners will worry about the unknown impacts on their house foundation, their driveways/walkways, their trees, etc from the construction needed to pipe to the street • Homeowners can't/won't take on a significant unplanned expense to pipe to the street • Homeowners won't want to pay a monthly user fee especially since they see no benefit to having a sewer Other than the lOish homes (approx. 3.3% of the potential homes) that are required to connect, very few additional homes will connect.
Question: If only 30 homes (10% of 300 potential homes) con nect to the sewer: • Will this small amount of users change each connected home's monthly user fee? If it will impact the user fee, please describe how the# of users relates to the user fee. • What, if any, operational issues would having only 30 users create? • What, if any, financial issues for the Sanitary District, the Town of Long Beach, for users, etc would having only 30 users create?
Question: • What %of the potential homes was assumed to connect in the PER to determine the sewer infrastructure needed?
Request: I strongly urge you to survey homeowners. Present them with the sewer's costs and benefits and ask whether they intend to connect. The responses will help you visualize usage. I believe that very few homes plan to connect and thus usage of the system will be far lower than modeled.
Thank you for listening and responding to the above.
Carter Elenz 2721 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360 Michael Kuss
From: Abigail
To Whom it May Concern-
I am a long-time resident of Long Beach and I am opposed to the installation of sewers along Lake Shore Drive. The Long Beach Town Council did not follow a transparent governance process. Pertinent information has not been shared with citizens even with a FOIA request. They have not received solid bids and have given a blank check. It is not appropriate to place an additional financial burden on all residents of Lake Shore Drive when 10 homes have an issue. Those homeowners should pay for repair of their own properties.
In addition, the Town Council has indicated this is an environmental issue. According to IDEM records ecoli levels in Long Beach have not exceeded the acceptable level to date this year.
I urge you to stop this project until a fully comprehensive and transparent plan is put in place. As of today 94 residents have signed a petition against this project you can find it here: https://www.thepetitionsite.com/290/988/100/voice-your-concern-for-long-beach-sewer-system/
Thank you Abigail Neary
1 Michael Kuss
From: Wendt family
Hello,
I was asked to email you my opposition of the Sewer project. I am writing to voice my strong support of sewers in Long Beach. Thank you for your dedication to this process. Hope we can get it done!
Rise Wendt Sent from my iPhone
1 Michael Kuss
From: meg
Please be advised that 2030 Lake Shore Drive does not agree with the unfair way Long Beach has decided to make only LSD residents pay for the new sewer system. The town should install sewers for all residents of Long Beach and split the cost among everyone. It makes sense to start on LSD since a FEW homes are having problems but that does not mean all of LSD should burden the cost alone. It is ridiculous and totally unfair. Part time LSD residents pay more than their share of taxes for many things they never use or use only 6 months of the year! I would love to hear the logic behind this idea and who on LSD agrees with it. The Town Council needs to listen to all members of the community especially the ones they are asking to foot the bill!
Please respond so I know you read this e-mail and I would appreciate some feedback. Also when is the public hearing and can we join virtually? Middle of the week in September is a very inconvenient time for (I would assume) a large portion of LSD residents to be able to attend. I'm sure that was intentionally planned!
Sincerely, Meg Dicks
1 Michael Kuss
From: Donna Campbell
To Whom it May Concern,
Our family has owned a home at Stop 25 on the south side of Lake Shore Drive for over 50 years. We want to express our support for the proposed sanitary sewer project for Lake Shore Drive in Long Beach.
We do not want to minimize the cost of the project. Our guess that there isn't anyone in Long Beach who would like to spend money needlessly. However, In this case we believe an investment in our town today will pay off with not only a better environment but also improved resale value of our homes. Past generations of Long Beach residents invested in the infrastructures that we are enjoying today. Now it is our turn. So please join us in our support of this needed project.
With a sewer system along Lake Shore Drive, the city would be responsible for its operation. Since a sewer system is built to withstand heavy loads, it can better accommodate periods of heavy precipitation and storm surges which can overwhelm a smaller home based septic system.
There would not be a concern for the proper installation, maintenance and service of a septic system which is the responsibility of the owner. There would not be a worry of a backup or breakdown of a private septic system, as there is now, because wastewater treatment is offsite. With the lake levels rising on an annual basis, many of the present septic systems along the lake could be in danger of failing and depositing the wastewater in the lake. This affects all the residents of Long Beach.
Most importantly, we will be protecting our precious resource, Lake Michigan, for the use and enjoyment of all Long Beach residents.
1 Sincerely,
Dennis and Renee Crowley
Denise and Dave Brenner
Donna and Jack Campbell
2523 Lake Shore Drive
Long Beach
2 Michael Kuss
From: April Mytyk
Please be advised that I am totally AGAINST any sewer installation in the Town of Long Beach . I reside at 2021 Oriole Trail.
Please feel free to contact me at [email protected] or 219-879-6449if you should require any further information.
Regards, April Mytyk
1 Michael Kuss
From: Melissa Warneke < [email protected]> Sent: Sunday, September 06, 2020 9:40 PM To: LB Public Hearing Subject: Long Beach sewer - in opposition
To whom it may concern, I am a resident of Long Beach res iding at 2027 Lake Shore Dr. We moved here in June of 2019 when our septic was inspected and the system was found to be in good working condition. The town council Is stating that they think the sewers are needed because there is an environmental issue; however, they have no data or evidence to support this claim. In fact, beach closures do not support this claim. Please do not move forward with this project without clear facts and data along with a fiscally responsible plan to support it. We can not afford this during this difficult time in the current economy. The town council has not effectively notified residents of their intentions either. With many residents unaware of these potential plans causing a hardship on residents is not the right thing to do. Thank you, Melissa Warneke 312-507-1552
Sent from my iPhone
1 Michael Kuss
From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, September 07, 2020 9:18 AM To: LB Public Hearing Subject: Longbeach sewers
In response to the sewers on Lake Shore Dr. It is our belief that sewers would be beneficial in protecting our greatest asset. In addition, our residence is on the hill side. It is our hope to connect to the proposed project. We support the efforts to protect the environment in going forward.
Sheila and Michael Haggerty 2513 Lake Shore Dr. Long Beach
1 Michael Kuss
From: THOMAS STEVENSON
We are strongly against the installation of a sewer system along Lake Shore Drive (LSD) in Long Beach. The survey provided to LSD homeowners a few years ago was not consistent as to what is currently being planned. The initial cost estimate provided from Long Beach was -$95/month (for 30 years) and now it is at $165/month, for 35 years. That is an incredible increase in a 1 % year time span. At this point, the final construction cost is still unknown. Additionally, the projected payment per LSD resident appears to add up to much more than the projected costs plus interest.
This whole process of the sewer project has been the most frustrating situation. We usually aren't ones to think this way but this whole project and the way it has been handled feels very non transparent. The board should be there for us and instead it's very against listening and hearing the point of view of the majority. Based on information provided by the town council, only 10-12 north side homes have been impacted by a septic system failure. Why are the remaining 280 home owners being financially affected by poor decisions made by these new homeowners, home builders, the LB Building Commission and LaPorte County Health Department? Septic systems should never have been approved for installation on the north side of newly built homes on LSD. Now, the remaining LSD residences have to pay for the mistakes made by a few with many residences not being able to afford the cost of the sewer system.
It would appear that the most democratic solution to this issue would be the continued "pump and haul" status for the 10-12 north side homes with failed septic systems (which would amount to approximately the same cost per house of the recommended sewer system) and leaving the remaining LSD residences with the task of properly maintaining their current septic systems. The project should be placed on hold at this time until sewers can be installed through-out the entire town.
Sincerely
Tom & Michelle Stevenson
2515 Lake Shore Drive
1 Michael Kuss
From: Charlene Mitchell
Hello, in advance if tomorrow's meeting, I am writing in opposition to the project as currently outlined. I am a property owner in Long Beach. The scope, expense, lack of transparency, and lack of general fairness are some of my concerns. Thank you.
1 Michael Kuss
From: Carter Elenz
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments I questions.
Comment: I believe less than 10% of the 290 homes will connect to the sewer.
Question: If less than 10% of homes connect to the sewer, will it become necessary for the: • Sanitation District • And/or the Town of Long Beach To require that more homes connect to the sewer? If yes, why/when will it be necessary to force greater connection? If no, what assurances can be provided that it won't become necessary to force more homes to connect?
Thank you for responding.
Carter Elenz 2721 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360
1 Michael Kuss
From: Carter Elenz
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments I questions.
Question: Why was it decided to make the homeowners pay for the installation of the sewer main line and related infrastructure?
Question: Previously, when sewer main lines have been installed in existing neighborhoods already served by septic, who paid for sewer main line installation?
Thank you for responding.
Carter Elenz 2721 Lake Shore Drive long Beach, IN 46360 Michael Kuss
From: Carter Elenz
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments I questions.
Comment: We are homeowners on Lake Shore Drive and we are against the installation of a main line sewer as proposed in the PER.
Reasons: • 290 homes are being forced to pay for a sewer that very few of the homes will actually connect to • There must be a more cost-efficient solution that helps our neighbors address their specific problem without burdening everyone with the cost of a broad sewer installation that very few homes will connect to.
Thank you.
Carter & Lisa Elenz 2721 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360
1 Michael Kuss
From: Dan Ryan
Will we be able to attend special public hearing on Wednesday via Zoom? If so what is the meeting id etc? Thank you. Dan Ryan 2011 Lakeshore
Sent from my iPhone Michael Kuss
From: Long Beach Residents Against the Sewer
I am a long-time Long Beach resident and I am opposed to the sewer project as proposed:
- The Town Council has not provided any plans -The Town Council has not notified homeowners- private citizens have been raising awareness - Myself and 108 of my neighbors have signed a petition against this -The Town is giving a blank check to contractors - There are 10 homes at most this applies to- let them pay the costs of the project- Long Beach Town Council already granted 2 homeowners to connect to the MCSD at their own cost- so there is precedent for personal action - the rest of the homeowners with working septics should not be penalized.
Thank you Abigail Neary
1 Michael Kuss
From: Jim Scott
Based on the long term success of our septic systems it is not acceptable to burden the city with Lake Shore homeowners issues of stupidity relative to their sewer problems. Force them to pump it or pay for their lake shore sewer line.
James Cameron Scott 2912 Lothair Way, Long Beach, IN 46360
Mobile: 219 741-4559
1 Michael Kuss
From: William H. Wendt
We've lived at 1922 LSD for 50 years.
I would be much cheaper to allow people to fix their seawalls and repair their septics. We do not need LSD torn up again.
Purdue has published papers explaining why septics are better than sewers. I've been told by a major septic designer that there are still spills from an over-taxed system in Michigan City into Trail Creek and thus Lake Michigan.
1 Michael Kuss
From: Alan Krema
To whom it may concern, I am writing to inform you that I am opposed to the Long Beach sewer project as it currently is proposed. There are various reasons for my opposition, financial, public fairness, and long term sustainability.
My name is Alan Krema and I live at 2611 Lake Shore Drive in Long Beach . Thank you.
1 Michael Kuss
From: Linda Sperling < [email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2020 8:20 PM To: LB Public Hearing Subject: Sewer petition
I am against the LSD sewer project.
The 80% homeowners not affected at all do not need to carry the burden for those dozen-or-less affected.
Signed: Linda Sperling 219 874 2291 Stop 18 Michael Kuss
From: Dave Warneke
To Whom it May Concern,
I am e-mailing to voice my concern regarding the Long Beach Sewer Project. I am not in favor of moving forward with this project as currently proposed. There has been very little transparency from the Long Beach Town Council regarding this project. Environmental concerns with regard to Lake Michigan have been cited as a main driver yet no data has been provided as such.
Also, if keeping Lake Michigan safe is the main concern, the cost of sewer installation should be borne by the entire community, as everyone enjoys access to the Lake and should be concerned for its well-being.
Many Long Beach residents still do not know this is happening. I cannot support this project until such time that additional information is provided and a more cohesive plan is presented.
Thank you, Dave Warneke 2027 Lake Shore Drive
1 Michael Kuss
From: Amanda Ferlmann
Dear Sir/Madam, Sewers on LSD are unnecessary based on scientific data especially at this time of high lake levels & economic uncertainty. Also, La Porte county mandated property tax hikes of 37% 2 years ago from which we are still recovering.
Vote NO on Lake Shore Dr sewers.
Sincerely, Amanda Ferlmann 2731 LSD (20 years)
1 Michael Kuss
From: Linda Hnatusko
As a resident of Long Beach Indiana Whom also resides on LSD I am directly effected by the proposed sewer project. I have followed the zoom meeting and spoke to the Town Council. The response to questions raised by the citizens of Long Beach have been unclear, misleading, or simply a I don't know response. Our concern have not been addressed properly. Also do to the Covid pandemic, many of the Elderly Citizens lack of zooming knowledge and are not able to participate in this process. Unfortunately, they are unaware. Our own town Council has exhibited trouble zooming effectively since CoVid including last month meeting. I feel this project is extremely expensive and unfair that LSD residents are paying 100 percent of the project. We have asked repeatedly for our local government to apply for state and federal assistance. But meet with a no response. Very poor local government in a time of a pandemic, job lost, and great economic certainty. Linda Hnatusko 2503 LSD Michael Kuss
From: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2020 3:50 PM To: LB Public Hearing Cc: PATRICK A. BECHT; Grace Becht; Tom Becht Subject: Long Beach Sewer Project
To whom this may concern from the MC /Committee
I am against this proposed sewer project because of
1: Lack of firm costs and financing options are punitive for those on the South /Side of Lake Shore Drive 2: Lack of due diligence of the parties involved to see if there would be some federal monies available because of pollution and Lake Michigan Erosion Programs 3: Sliding and escalating costs that are much too vague and the scope of future hookups, multiple future sewer line hookups from other streets within Long Beach.
Please do not approve this inititave!
Regards,
Bill
William A Becht 2925 Lakeshore Drive long Beach IN 46360 630-337-6220 Cell Michael Kuss
From: Jim Brady
My name is James Brady and I live at 2617 Lake Shore Drive. My wife and I have owned our home here since 1994. I am apposed to this project and I feel the people on Lake Shore Drive have been misled by the town council, throughout this process.
I would like to enter my opposition into the public record for the September 9 Public Hearing. This multi-million dollar project should not be the sole responsibility of the Lake Shore Drive residents.
For the Michigan City sanitary district and the town of Long Beach to decide there is a serious problem. However, the only people responsible to pay for it are the Lake Shore Drive owners, is an irresponsible decision. This project is supposed to protect the lake, will benefit the entire community, in addition to all Northwest Indiana residents and visitors.
I formally request you to abandon this poorly planned multi million dollar Lake Shore Drive sewer project. This puts a totally unfair burden on the residents of Lake Shore Drive who will incur Expenses of $50,000-$70,000. These lumbers are based on cost to hook up and monthly payments over 35 years.
Sincere, Jim and Terri Brady 2617 Lake Shore Dr, Long Beach, IN 46360
Sent from Gmail Mobile
1 Michael Kuss
From: Michael Gorman
Michigan City Sanitary District Public Hearing September 9, 2020 Long Beach Lake Shore Drive Sewer Project
Please enter my comments in OPPOSITION into the public record for the September 9 Public Hearing.
We are residents of Lake Shore Drive in Long Beach. We are opposed to the multi-million dollar proposed Lake Shore Drive sewer project. As proposed, this multi-million dollar project is to be funded 100% by only the Long Beach residents residing on Lake Shore Drive.
It is fundamentally unfair and abjectly discriminatory for the Michigan City Sanitary District and the Town of Long Beach to force a select group of Long Beach residents to pay 100% of the cost of a multi-million dollar public infrastructure project that would benefit the entire Town of Long Beach, as well as provide an environmental improvement to the waters of Lake Michigan which would benefit all northwest Indiana residents and visitors.
I implore you to abandon the proposed multi-million dollar Lake Shore Drive sewer projectlt which would impose a GENERATIONS LONG SIGNIFICANT MONTHLY COST upon a select group of Long Beach homeowners on Lake Shore Drive.
Sincerely,
Michael and Linda Gorman 2313 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN
1 Michael Kuss
From: Michael Kuss Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 12:08 PM To: LB Public Hearing Subject: FW: Long Beach Lake Shore Drive Sewer Project
From: Robert LeMay
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: Michael Gorman
For Your Consideration ...
Begin forwarded message:
From: Michael Gorman
Michigan City Sanitary District Public Hearing September 9, 2020 Long Beach Lake Shore Drive Sewer Project
Please enter my comments in OPPOSITION into the public record for the September 9 Public Hearing.
We are residents of Lake Shore Drive in Long Beach. We are opposed to the multi million dollar proposed Lake Shore Drive sewer project. As proposed, this multi-million dollar project is to be funded 100% by only the Long Beach residents residing on Lake Shore Drive.
It is fundamentally unfair and abjectly discriminatory for the Michigan City Sanitary District and the Town of Long Beach to force a select group of Long Beach residents to 1 pay 100% of the cost of a multi-million dollar public infrastructure project that would benefit the entire Town of Long Beach, as well as provide an environmental improvement to the waters of Lake Michigan which would benefit all northwest Indiana residents and visitors.
I implore you to abandon the proposed multi-million dollar Lake Shore Drive sewer projectlt which would impose a GENERATIONS LONG SIGNIFICANT MONTHLY COST upon a select group of Long Beach homeowners on Lake Shore Drive.
Sincerely,
Michael and Linda Gorman 2313 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN
2 Michael Kuss
From: Sharon Goodman
What happens when all of Long Beach decides to hook in? LSD residents pay for it, everyone else jumps in for $127/mo!! Sweet deal!!
1 Michael Kuss
From: Ed Gausselin < [email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2020 6:37 PM To: LB Public Hearing Subject: Sewer Questions
1} Does the engineering include oversizing and additional cost in order to meet future expansion for the entire Town. 2} Has additional funding sources been explored by Haas Engineering in order to pay for certain costs that benefit the entire Town. For instance, the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program that provides for a 75% payment of all costs for the LSD reconstruction cost that will benefit the entire Town, not just the LSD owners? Other grants to address the "Public Health Nature" of the Project?
Ed Gausselin Michael Kuss
From: Carter Elenz
Hello, Would you please reply with a link to the recording of the call. Thank you, Carter Elenz
1 Michael Kuss
From: Carter Elenz
Access "Option 2" did not permit comments/questions.
Please include in the formal Public Hearing Comments: • the# of people that participated via the conference call line • that there was no method provided to enable callers to ask questions or make comments
I was unable to participate via Zoom so I used the Option 2 (phone dial in) provided in the Public Hearing notice. I was glad for this option, but surprised and frustrated that callers were not able to ask questions or make comments during the Public Hearing.
Thank you.
Carter Elenz 2721 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360
1 Michael Kuss
From: Carter Elenz
The Version of the Agreement between the Town and the Sanitary District in the PER is inaccurate.
In the PER, the unsigned, "Agreement for Funding, Design, Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Sanitary Sewer System between the Town of Long Beach and Michigan Sanitary District" is not the most recent version. Before submission of the PER to the IN Dept of Environmental Management, please replace it with the latest version.
Replacing the obsolete version is critical. The old version will mislead funding decision makers into believing that within 3 years, all 290 homes will be connected to the sewer. The Town of Long Beach, as expressed in the latest version of the Agreement, is not requiring homes to connect to the sewer.
Therefore, actual utilization of the sewer will be far below what was estimated. Unknowingly, funding could be approved for a sewer that very few homes actually connect to yet 290 homeowners have to pay $7million for.
Thank you in advance for responding and including in the public comments.
Carter Elenz 2721 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360 Michael Kuss
From: Carter Elenz
A new Survey of residents should be conducted before funding approval is deciding on.
Critical information about who will pay for the sewer and how much it costs has changed dramatically over the past 21 months! During the Public Hearing, lead presenter Jim M from engineering firm Hass&Associates, stated that the costs today are "considerably higher" than what was communicated in the December 2018 survey. The 2018 survey should not be considered a valid indication of homeowner intention.
Before approving any funding, please require a new survey be fielded that presents the residents with the latest Benefits and the latest Costs.
Only 10 of the 290 homes are required to connect so it is critical to know the intentions of the other 97% of residents before any decision is made. I believe far fewer homeowners will connect to the sewer than the December 2018 survey suggests. Please survey residents to find out.
Thank you in advance for responding and including in the public comments.
Carter Elenz 2721 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360
1 Michael Kuss
From: Carter Elenz
I am disappointed that no " non sewer" solutions were considered in the PER .
The PER included 4 alternatives. One alternative is "no action" and the other three alternatives are Sewer va riations.
The issue is localized to 10 homes. Yet all of the sewer solutions place cost burden on all 290 homes.
Why wasn't at least one more surgical alternative, such as relocating the septics of the 10 homes, assessed as an alternative?
As a possible solution, the septics of the 10 homes could be moved: • from the rear of the home where they are vulnerable to lake erosion • to the front of the home where they are not. The new septics would reside not far from where the proposed sewer line would be. The LaPorte County Board of Health could have been enjoined as a partner in the assessment of an alternative like this. If feasible, this would provide a solution for the 10 homes much sooner than a sewer would.
Before funding is considered, I urge that another solution be assessed that helps our neighbors solve their specific problem without burdening everyone with $7M in debt.
Thank you in advance for responding and including in the public comments.
Carter Elenz 2721 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360 Michael Kuss
From: David Hoppe
We are writing in support of the sewer project proposed in Long Beach, Indiana. We are residents of Long Beach and while we do not live on Lakeshore Dr., we use a septic tank, as do most residents of Long Beach (some of us, incredibly, employ methods that actually predate septic tanks). Although understandable, it is a pity that the focus of the sewer issue in our town has centered on the residences along Lakeshore Dr. This creates a sense among some that a fraction of our homeowners are somehow being singled out for unfair treatment. But the entire town of Long Beach needs to finally come to grips with how we treat and dispose of waste. Our reliance on septic tanks dates back to a time when the community was not as dense and when homes were built to a smaller scale. Making a transition from septic to sewers was identified as a community need during the course of strategic planning in Long Beach. Unfortunately (if not surprisingly), our town has so far lacked the political will to fully endorse this need. But our need for sewers still exists. And so we support the proposed sewer project-- and we hope it will be the forerunner for a larger, comprehensive update to Long Beach's outdated sanitary infrastructure.
David and Melli Hoppe 1604 Oaks Ct. Long Beach, IN 46360
1 Michael Kuss
From: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 10:11 AM To: LB Public Hearing Subject: Meeting last night
Good morning Mike, Last night I listened to the sewer meeting pertaining to Long Beach. You held a very informative meeting. Thanks for all the input I live on the hill side of LSD and very much hope the sewer will be installed. Thanks again. Mike Haggerty 2513 LSD. Long Beach Michael Kuss
From: Annie
Good morning, Thank you for a very informative meeting last night. I have several questions: Who is responsible for repairs made to private property? ... if they need to dig up my patio or landscaping to install pipes and the pump.
How big is the pump that will be on my property? Is it noisy or smelly? Does the gravity pump require complicated maintenance?
Thank you for your response. Annie Malone 2957 LSD
Sent from my iPad
1 Michael Kuss
From: Jim Brady
I was surprised to hear at the meeting, the Long Beach Town Council conducted a sewer survey, for Lake Shore Drive in December of 2018:
First, December is an unusual month for a survey since many home owners are there for the spring, summer and fall months, not winter. In addition many full time residents head south for the winter.
Second, in December of 2018, no designs had been done and as a result no cost estimates could have been available. Thus any vote for a sewer would be under the assumption the town would be putting it in without cost to the homeowners.
Third, why would they have been doing a sewer study in 2018 before we had the problems??
Based on the above thoughts I believe any survey would not be valid. With many people not available and no cost estimates how can one decide if a sewer made sense?
Jim and Terri Brady 2617 Lake Shore Dr, Long Beach, IN 46360
1 Michael Kuss
From: Michael Gorman
MCSD :
I am requesting a copy of the proceedings, including all documents exhibited during the hearing, from the Sept. 9 public hearing concerning the Long Beach Lake Shore Drive sewer project.
Thank you,
Michael Gorman 2313 lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360 Email: [email protected] Michael Kuss
From: Christopher D'Amato
As a resident of Long Beach, who lives on the south/upland side of Lake Shore Drive, I am opposed to being required to connect my home to a wastewater/sewer line contemplated under Lake Shore Drive as I currently have a completely adequate and functioning septic system that more than meets the demands of my home. One of the factors in deciding to purchase this home, was the fact that there was an adequate septic system and, therefore, no additional costs (other than pumping) associated with payments for sewer/wastewater. The single factor driving the contemplated construction of this sewer line is that a number of homes on the north/beachside of !Lake Shore Drive have inadequate septics for the size of their usage (because they increased the size of the residence substantially from what existed, often times in violation of existing zoning/building codes) or failed to maintain their septic systems or had their septics situates in an area subject to erosion as a result of wave action. To now require that ALL homeowners on Lake Shore Drive, including those that have perfectly functioning septics, at a tremendous cost which could exceed tens of thousands of dollars for each home, is an unfair and unconstitutional taking of property rights in violation of both state and federal constitutions. It is acknowledged that the only reason that this sewer system is being planned is because of the failure of a number of septic systems on the north/beachside of Lake Shore Drive. If lake levels are going to continue to rise , and there exists a concern that more lakeside septics could be similarly compromised, then the lakeside properties should all be assessed for the construction of the sewer and related infrastructure, and only those that actually connect to the sewer should be assessed for operation and maintenance of the system. If an upland side homeowner wishes to connect to the system at a later date, for whatever reason, they will need to pay a connection fee and then regular maintenance fees for the system. To require them to connect to and pay for the construction and maintenance of this system when they have perfectly good and functioning septic systems that they have invested construction and maintenance dollars in is an unfair and unconstitutional taking.
Sent from my iPhone
1 Michael Kuss
From: Patsi Gately < [email protected]> Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2020 2:58 PM To: LB Public Hearing Subject: sewers along Lakeshore Drive Long Beach
Dear Sirs, You have probably heard mostly from residents who oppose the sewers proposed along Lakeshore Drive. I am in favor of constructing those sewers along Lakeshore drive. I am a resident of 43 years. My kids, grand kids etc have played in that lake for all of these past 50 or so years ... and it boggles my mind to think that homes along the lake would NOT have sewers to carry their grey water and toilet water away from the lake. When one considers that on any given nice weekend there are usually a minimum of 3 cars, but often as many as 6-sometimes more, vehicles parked at each address along lakeshore drive ... which would be how many people using the toilets, showers, sinks etc??? Then it SEEMS to me that there really is NO way to prevent sewage from seeping into the lake or the groundwater in communities that are situated on the lake. I live 5 blocks in ... I pump every other year ... I still find it a fantasy to think the sewage, pesticides and herbicides, cleaning products, personal care products, pharmaceuticals can be safely cleaned from the water that comes from the homes ... not to mention storm drains ... but that's a different topic. To me, and I do realize there aren't many vocal people who share this opinion, it is unconscionable to allow the grey water and other water NOT to have sewers near the lake. It is expensive, but the destruction of this lake by allowing effluent to continue to pollute the lake will be a horrendous expense in the long run. Ethically we have a moral duty to protect the environment we live in. It is way past time to do something about this before it becomes a public health issue. Thank you Patsi Gately 2601 Oriole Trail Long Beach IN
1 Michael Kuss
From: KEVIN HNATUSKO
When you say, "would not be valid", i'm sure what you mean.
On 09/10/2020 1:44PM Jim Brady
I was surprised to hear at the meeting, the Long BeachTown Council conducted a sewer survey, for Lake Shore Drive in December of 2018:
First, December is an unusual month for a survey since many home owners are there for the spring, summer and fall months, not winter. In addition many full time residents head south for the winter.
Second, in December of 2018, no designs had been done and as a result no cost estimates could have been available. Thus any vote for a sewer would be under the assumption the town would be putting it in without cost to the homeowners.
Third, why would they have been doing a sewer study in 2018 before we had the problems??
Based on the above thoughts I believe any survey would not be valid. With many people not available and no cost estimates how can one decide if a sewer made sense?
Jim and Terri Brady 2617 Lake Shore Dr, Long Beach, IN 46360
1 Michael Kuss
From: THOMAS STEVENSON
We are strongly against the installation of a sewer system along Lake Shore Drive (LSD) in Long Beach at this time. Currently the small number of LSD residence are being held responsible for the installation of a sewer system at an astronomical cost. This amount includes capital costs that should be explored in ways to reduce the overall cost. Additionally, the projected payment per LSD resident appears to add up to much more than the projected costs plus interest. Based on information provided by the town council, only 10-12 north side homes have been impacted by a septic system failure. Why are the remaining 280 home owners being financially affected by poor decisions made by these new homeowners, home builders, the Long Beach Building Commission and La Porte County Health Department? Septic systems should never have been approved for installation on the north side of newly built homes on LSD.
A survey was given two years ago and it does not reflect current conditions. The survey provided to LSD homeowners a few years ago was not accurate as to what is currently being planned. The initial cost estimate provided from Long Beach was -$95/month (for 30 years) and now it is at a minimum of $165/month, for 35 years. That is an incredible increase in a 1 Y2 year time span.
Many LSD residence are not aware of the sewer plans. Attending Zoom meetings held by the Long Beach Town Council was been very frustrating. The board members do not respond to questions asked and the overall process for this project has been vague and not transparent. Please take a minute to imagine yourself on a very tight budget, watching a zoom meeting where board members obviously aren't listening because they have already made their decision. It has caused some residence including us to being to search for a new residence outside of Long Beach.
If it is decided that sewers are desired, then sewers should be installed throughout the entire town of Long Beach. Lake Shore Drive residence should not be singled out. If it is decided that sewers are desired, then the following should be researched:
·A tax should be charged to the entire town.
· Re-paving LSD should be done in the most economical way. It should not be done in segments because that is the most convenience for those traveling through. The LSD residence are the ones paying for the road when the entire town benefits from using it.
It would appear that the most logical solution to this issue would be the continued "pump and haul" status for the 10-12 north side homes with failed septic systems (which would amount to approximately the same cost per house of the recommended sewer system) and leaving the remaining LSD residences with the task of properly maintaining their current septic systems.
Sincerely Tom & Michelle Stevenson 2515 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, Indiana 46360
2 We are strongly against the installation of a sewer system along Lake Shore Drive (LSD) in Long Beach at this time. Currently the small number of LSD residence are being held responsible for the installation of a sewer system at an astronomical cost. This amount includes capital costs that should be explored in ways to reduce the overall cost. Additionally, the projected payment per LSD resident appears to add up to much more than the projected costs plus interest. Based on information provided by the town council, only I 0-12 north side homes have been impacted by a septic system failure. Why are the remaining 280 home owners being financially affected by poor decisions made by these new homeowners, home builders, the Long Beach Building Commission and La Porte County Health Department? Septic systems should never have been approved for installation on the north side of newly built homes on LSD.
A survey was given two years ago and it does not reflect current conditions. The survey provided to LSD homeowners a few years ago was not accurate as to what is currently being planned. The initial cost estimate provided from Long Beach was -$95/month (for 30 years) and now it is at a minimum of $165/month, for 35 years. That is an incredible increase in a I Y2 year time span.
Many LSD residence are not aware of the sewer plans. Attending Zoom meetings held by the Long Beach Town Council was been very frustrating. The board members do not respond to questions asked and the overall process for this project has been vague and not transparent. Please take a minute to imagine yourself on a very tight budget, watching a zoom meeting where board members obviously aren't listening because they have already made their decision. It has caused some residence including us to being to search for a new residence outside of Long Beach.
If it is decided that sewers are desired, then sewers should be installed throughout the entire town of Long Beach. Lake Shore Drive residence should not be singled out. If it is decided that sewers are desired, then the following should be researched: • A tax should be charged to the entire town. • Re-paving LSD should be done in the most economical way. It should not be done in segments because that is the most convenience for those traveling through. The LSD residence are the ones paying for the road when the entire town benefits from using it. Jt would appear that the most logical solution to this issue would be the continued "pump and haul" status for the I 0-12 north side homes with failed septic systems (which would amount to approximately the same cost per house of the recommended sewer system) and leaving the remaining LSD residences with the task of properly maintaining their current septic systems.
Please take the time to review the responses to "Petition to Stop the Long Beach Sewer System on Lake Shore Drive". It currently has over I 00 supporters within Long Beach. We can not take on the financial burden of the loan. Please do not approve the loan for the LSD sewer system. Sincerely
Tom & Michelle Stevenson~~-
2515 Lake Shore Drive ~.., \ ~ Long Beach, Indiana 46360 Michael Kuss
From: THOMAS STEVENSON
Please take the time to review the responses to "Petition to Stop the Long Beach Sewer System on Lake Shore Drive". It currently has over 100 supporters within Long Beach. We can not take on the financial burden of the loan. Please do not approve the loan for the Lake Shore Drive sewer system.
Sincerely
Tom & Michelle Stevenson 2515 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, Indiana 46360
1 Michael Kuss
From: Linda Hnatusko
Date: September 13, 2020
To: Whom It May Concern:
From: Linda & Kevin Hnatusko
2503 Lake Shore Drive
Long Beach, IN 46360
Re: New Sewer System Project
Please accept our comments and questions within the allowed five day period for inclusion to the narrative of the public record in regards to the meeting conducted on September 9th, by the Michigan City Sanitary District for the review of the Preliminary Engineering Report of the Long Beach Sewer System project.
• The Long Beach Town Council (TC) arbitrarily ignored the option to create tax revenues to pay for a project that benefits the entire town and instead charge an ever-changing select group of homeowners, an ever-increasing user fee whether they use it or even need it. Why was there no discussion of this other financing option, let alone any meaningful consideration, in any of their few meetings, before rushing ahead, during an emerging pandemic no less, preventing meaningful homeowner participation with their input during the process? • The TC did not stipulate that a town-wide Sewer System be given any serious consideration and then debated before rushing in adopting the bad plan. Despite this, the TC now alludes to a nebulous Phase 2 to come that was not appropriately studied as part of a comprehensive plan. Michigan City Sanitary District stated clearly that this option is not under consideration because MCSD were "never asked to do it" by the TC . It is hard to believe there would not be extraordinary benefits to the entire town to do a unified project with corresponding economies of scale, the current availability of favorable financing, an aggressive pursuit of outside monies, etc. How can this be considered a comprehensive plan with an alleged second phase not
1 spelled out, without the completion of a study with input by the entire town residents in reaction to such a study? Why was there zero consideration to develop such a comprehensive plan? • This proposed "skinny" plan includes the main line down Lake Shore Drive (LSD) with only homeowners with an LSD address, required to pay a fee. This plan alludes to this unspecified future phase with some additional lines that will run down the side streets and ultimately connect to LSD. Common sense mandates this future expansion necessitates the main line be constructed with T-connections with these side streets now. However, again without any consideration or debate, the TC elected to not utilize this T-connection to enforce the 300' rule that would allow easily connectible properties access to the new Sewer System. Surely the net cost to all the individual homeowners being forced to pay a user fee, would be reduced by this most basic of incremental steps. Wouldn't this be the most efficient and practical approach to take to proceed, and to not consider it seriously before proceeding, simply epitomize bad government? • A two-part question was asked at the meeting with only part two of the question answered. The unanswered part of the question was regarding the TC relying heavily on the misleading, outdated 2018 survey of LSD home-owner's preferences regarding a Sewer System. The question is was there serious consideration given by the TC on sending out a new survey that includes updated, accurate cost information and clear statement of the assessment terms and subsequent homeowner connection expenses? If not, then why not? • The TC clearly relied heavily on the results of this misleading survey prepared in 2018 by an ad-hoc committee of two, that included one person of the two who lives on LSD. This one member subsequently became a new member of the TC within the last year, and in short order under the cover of poorly run Zoom meetings, voted in the majority to approve this project. Didn't this TC member who lives on LSD and lobbied other non-LSD living members of the TC in support of the project, shouldn't he have at least abstained from then voting for it? • Reference was made to a "contingency" fund to cover cost overruns, etc. Presumably, this is the 25% premium required by the SRF based on the financial structure of the project as proposed first by LBTC and now MCSD. Also, by securing two loans of uneven length of payback with a fluctuating payback schedule and without straight-line amortization of the bonds, there results an artificially higher monthly user fee. This along with the "contingency" results in a surplus of more than $6,000,000 over the life of the payback. Presumably, these funds will be set aside earning interest at market rates. However, no reference was ever noted in the TC meeting minutes into the management of these excess funds. This highly material amount of excess cash flow, again presumably, because there was not any discussion noted in the minutes, not given any consideration by the TC, or was it discussed only outside the meetings themselves? How will this excess money be returned to the homeowners who are being forced into paying the fee? Couldn't this entire plan be dramatically improved by giving consideration to provide a new Sewer System for the entire town and financing the project with tax revenues, and not a user fee with artificially inflated assessments for a sub-set of all the beneficiaries of this plan, which is the entire town? • Presumably, again because it was never made clear, the new Sewer System down LSD will provide a stub to every buildable empty lot on LSD. If homeowners are forced to pay a user fee for capital costs for a stub whether they connect or not, why aren't empty lot owners paying for their stub? Wouldn't including more user fees from these lot owners, let alone allowing those homeowners easily connectable within 300' on the side street to connect if Long Beach is only to do a "skinny" plan, reduce the net capital fee currently required to only those limited homeowners with LSD addresses? Why wasn't even a rudimentary analysis considered?
In summary, the Long Beach Town Council failed the citizens of our town with promoting and approving this clear and obvious wrong-headed bad plan. Now our citizens need the Michigan City
2 Sanitary District and ultimately the State of Indiana to reject this plan and return it to the Town Council for further study and development, with full participation in the process afforded to its citizens.
3 1
Date: September 13, 2020
To: Whom It May Concern:
From : Linda & Kevin Hnatusko 2503 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360
Re: New Sewer System Project
Please accept our comments and questions within the allowed five day period for inclusion to the narrative of the public record in regards to the meeting conducted on September gth, by the Michigan City Sanitary District for the review of the Preliminary Engineering Report of the Long Beach Sewer System project.
• The Long Beach Town Council (TC) arbitrarily ignored the option to create tax revenues to pay for a project that benefits the entire town and instead charge an ever-changing select group of homeowners, an ever-increasing user fee whether they use it or even need it. Why was there no discussion of this other financing option, let alone any meaningful consideration, in any of their few meetings, before rushing ahead, during an emerging pandemic no less, preventing meaningful homeowner participation with their input during the process? • The TC did not stipulate that a town-wide Sewer System be given any serious consideration and then debated before rushing in adopting the bad plan. Despite this, the TC now alludes to a nebulous Phase 2 to come that was not appropriately studied as part of a comprehensive plan. Michigan City Sanitary District stated clearly that this option is not under consideration because MCSD were "never asked to do it" by the TC. It is hard to believe there would not be extraordinary benefits to the entire town to do a unified project with corresponding economies of scale, the current availability of favorable financing, an aggressive pursuit of outside monies, etc. How can this be considered a comprehensive plan with an alleged second phase not spelled out, without the completion of a study with input by the entire town residents in reaction to such a study? Why was there zero consideration to develop such a comprehensive plan? • This proposed "skinny" plan includes the main line down Lake Shore Drive (LSD) with only homeowners with an LSD address, required to pay a fee. This plan alludes to this unspecified future phase with some additional lines that will run down the side streets and ultimately connect to LSD. Common sense mandates this future expansion necessitates the main line be constructed with T connections with these side streets now. However, again without any consideration or debate, the TC elected to not utilize this T-connection to enforce the 300' rule that would allow easily connectible properties access to the new Sewer System. Surely the net cost to all the individual homeowners being forced to pay a user fee, would be reduced by this most basic of incremental steps. Wouldn't this be the most efficient and practical approach to take to proceed, and to not consider it seriously before proceeding, simply epitomize bad government? 2
• A two-part question was asked at the meeting with only part two of the question answered. The unanswered part of the question was regarding the TC relying heavily on the misleading, outdated 2018 survey of LSD home-owner's preferences regarding a Sewer System. The question is was there serious consideration given by the TC on sending out a new survey that includes updated, accurate cost information and clear statement of the assessment terms and subsequent homeowner connection expenses? If not, then why not? • The TC clearly relied heavily on the results of this misleading survey prepared in 2018 by an ad-hoc committee of two, that included one person of the two who lives on LSD. This one member subsequently became a new member ofthe TC within the last year, and in short order under the cover of poorly run Zoom meetings, voted in the majority to approve this project. Didn't this TC member who lives on LSD and lobbied other non-LSD living members of the TC in support of the project, shouldn't he have at least abstained from then voting for it? • Reference was made to a "contingency" fund to cover cost overruns, etc. Presumably, this is the 25% premium required by the SRF based on the financial structure of the project as proposed first by LBTC and now MCSD. Also, by securing two loans of uneven length of payback with a fluctuating payback schedule and without straight-line amortization of the bonds, there results an artificially higher monthly user fee. This along with the "contingency" results in a surplus of more than $6,000,000 over the life of the payback. Presumably, these funds will be set aside earning interest at market rates. However, no reference was ever noted in the TC meeting minutes into the management of these excess funds. This highly material amount of excess cash flow, again presumably, because there was not any discussion noted in the minutes, not given any consideration by the TC, or was it discussed only outside the meetings themselves? How will this excess money be returned to the homeowners who are being forced into paying the fee? Couldn't this entire plan be dramatically improved by giving consideration to provide a new Sewer System for the entire town and financing the project with tax revenues, and not a user fee with artificially inflated assessments for a sub-set of all the beneficiaries of this plan, which is the entire town? • Presumably, again because it was never made clear, the new Sewer System down LSD will provide a stub to every buildable empty lot on LSD. If homeowners are forced to pay a user fee for capital costs for a stub whether they connect or not, why aren't empty lot owners paying for their stub? Wouldn't including more user fees from these lot owners, let alone allowing those homeowners easily connectable within 300' on the side street to connect if Long Beach is only to do a "skinny" plan, reduce the net capital fee currently required to only those limited homeowners with LSD addresses? Why wasn't even a rudimentary analysis considered?
In summary, the Long Beach Town Council failed the citizens of our town with promoting and approving this clear and obvious wrong-headed bad plan. Now our citizens need the Michigan City Sanitary District and ultimately the State of Indiana to reject this plan and return it to the Town Council for further study and development, with full participation in the process afforded to its citizens. Michael Kuss
From: Amy D'Amato
Good morning,
I am writing in opposition of the recently approved sewer project for Lake Shore Drive in the town of Long Beach. I am a resident on the South side of Lake Shore Drive with a fully functioning, well maintained, septic system and have no desire to attach to a sewer system. My understanding is that the estimated cost to install the sewer line will be billed to me@ approximately $127.76 p/m for the next 35 years even if I do not hook up to the sewer. That is $53,660 for a service that I do not need. Forcing me to pay for a service that I do not require is unfair and I consider it to be an unconstitutional taking of property rights.
It is unfortunate that 10 homes on the North side of Lake Shore Drive have experienced some kind of septic failure and others may be at risk. But, I would argue that the Town has allowed portions of the North side to be completely overbuilt and that, combined with the rising lake levels, this has contributed to the current situation. What's next? As the Lake continues to rise and these mammoth homes are built, will we be forced to pay to reenforce their foundations? We should not be held liable for the risk that Lake owners take when they purchase a home on the North side of Lake Shore Drive.
Thank you in advance for your consideration.
Sincerely, Amy D'Amato 1805 Lake Shore Drive
1 Michael Kuss
From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 10:38 AM To: LB Public Hearing Cc: Michael Kuss; 'Robert LeMay' Subject: LONG BEACH PUBUC HEARING COMMENT FOR THE RECORD Attachments: MC Sanitary District Public Comment TPA SLA.pdf
Please include the attached comments into the record for the LONG BEACH SEWER PER.
PLEASE CONFIRM RECEIPT.
Tim and Sue Anderson 2961 Lake Shore Drive Long Beach, IN 46360
1 TO: Michigan City Sanitary District
RE: LONG BEACH PUBLIC HEARING- PUBLIC COMMENT
FROM : Timothy Anderson & Susan Anderson
2961 Lake Shore Drive
Long Beach, IN 46360
Please include these comments in the public comment section of the record.
For the record: We are firmly against this project in its' current form. The engineering of this sewer project appears to be reasonable, however, the Long Beach Town Council (LBTC) has failed the citizens and has not performed its duties in rushing this concept through without proper due diligence and public comment, particularly during these times of lockdown and pandemic.
Points for consideration:
1. According to the latest information, the price tag of the project is 8.9 Million dollars to benefit approximately 10 homes at the current time 2. LBTC is conflating the "north si de mandate" by the county health department along with a 300' mandatory connection rule to force participation by southside Lake Shore Drive (LSD) owners, enabling the financial engineering required to make the project 'work'. 3. There is no evidence that the south side LSD homes pose any risks 4. Many homes are in closer proximity to LSD, whose address is not on LSD who are not included in the mandate, why? 5. Why has LBTC agreed to waive this mandate for those homeowners? 6. The project continues to move forward based on false, misleading, and substantially lower cost estimates from the original owner survey, each affected property owner should be re surveyed with current cost and financial impact, which over 20 years will be more than $50,000. Or a referendum vote. True and updated numbers for a 'connected' home to all affected owners should be provided. 7. No effort is being made to address new technologies to aid the 10 homeowners, or look for other solutions that may be available in the same time frames of the sewer construction project. Pump and Haul IS A SOLUTION! 8. Why are LSD property owners being asked to bear 100% of the costs, that include $725,000 to re-build LSD that is used by all of Long Beach as well as visitors and truck traffic? 9. The current lea ders insist there will be no future connections from properties other than LSD, however, there will be many homes with an easy downhill lateral connection to LSD along various side streets, it is hard to believe they will not be connected to the LSD sewer. LBTC has not considered how LSD owners that paid for initial construction will be reimbursed for this potential future use. 10. Why is the plan based on address and not proximity to LSD? Why did LBTC waive the '300 foot state mandate' for connection, allowing properties closer to the lake to avoid forced participation? 11. Not included in the pricing but an additional option being considered by the LBTC is an upgrade of some water supply lines as part of the open trench sewer construction ... again, a project that benefits others not paying for the project. 12. LBTC has no 'skin in the game', it seems easy to spend other peoples money for what in many cases will benefit all of the town or a very select few at the expense of many. 13. A more pragmatic solution should be considered, a price tag of nearly 1 million dollars per house to fix their problems does not seem equitable in anyway. This is like killing a mosquito with a 'bazooka'!
Please REJECT this approach! Michael Kuss
From: Abby Neary
To whom it may concern- Please include in the record that as of 9/15/2020 over 120 people, mostly residents, have signed the petition against sewers in Long Beach. Please see the attached.
As of today we now stand at 122 signatures. You can also find the most recent updates at this link: https://www.thepetitionsite.com/290/988/100/voice-your-concern-for-long-beach-sewer-system/
Thank you Abigail Neary
1 Num Date First Name Las City State/Provinc Country Why is this important to you? 1 7/9/20 Abby Ne. Long Beach Indiana United States 2 7/10/20 Jody Laz Long Beach Indiana United States 3 7/10/20 James Sec Long Beach Indiana United State! The economic impact and risk deserve a better analysis of the size of the real problem and alternative solutions. 4 7/10/20 william Be1 Long Beach Indiana United State! There are too many unanswered questions and it feels more like a blank spending project which cost will be born by a few yet enjoyed eventually by many more including LSD improvements that are part of this endeavor. 5 7/10/20 Joann Bal Long Beach Indiana United State! It is not fair to burden all residents of Lake Shore Drive with the still unknown cost of sewers. The majority of these residents have working and adequate septic systems. Additionally, there are still too many unknown factors such as which septic system is the Town considering (3 were discussed 2 years ago), where will the pumping stations be located, are there alternative solutions that have not been discussed besides the continued solution of pump & haul for the impacted residences?? The County is not mandating sewers; what is their suggested solution?? For this capital investment there needs to be much more discussion and information provided. 6 7/10/20 Thomas Kin Long Beach Indiana United States 7 7/10/20 Marjorie Kin Long Beach Indiana United States 8 7/10/20 Michael Go Long Beach Indiana United State ~ As a property owner on the south side of LSD, I would be forced to pay approx. $15,000 upfront and approx. $175/month ($2,100/annual) for the rest of my life- and then my children thereafter - for a sewer that is meant to benefit the properties on the north side of LSD . It is unconscionable to force me to subsidize the homeowners on the north side of LSD. The homes on the north side of LSD have been selling for well in excess of one million dollars despite the spector of this sewer issue. The issue concerning their sewers has not depressed property values. The properties on the north side of LSD should bear the full cost of a sewer that is needed solely to benefit their properties. 9 7/10/20 James Brz Long Beach Indiana United State~ I think it is unfair and unjust to make hundreds of families pay for the problems caused by a few. These problems are the result of people building enormous homes and violations of numerous rules. I have owned since 1993 and have a perfectly working septic. I pump every year or so for a few hundred dollars. 10 7/10/20 Jeanette Sec Long Beach Indiana United State ~ It seems unnecessary, laCMII researched and expensive. 11 7/10/20 Terri Brz Long Beach Indiana United States 12 7/10/20 Amanda Fer Long Beach Indiana United State ~ Property taxes rose 37% 2019. County mandated lots all worth $400,000 13 7/11/20 Robert Ro1 Long Beach Indiana United State~ The proposed cost should be shared by all of Long Beach property owners in that the project as proposed will ultimately provide sewers for all of Long Beach. 14 7/11/20 Sharon Go Long Beach Indiana United State ~ Septics are what has always been here and have worked well. Assuming we can all afford this large capital expense Is presumptuous! 15 7/12/20 David W-e Long Beach Indiana United States 16 7/13/20 Jane Ne Long Beach Indiana United State ~ Not necessary, too close to lake 17 7/13/20 josephine kru Long Beach Indiana United State! It is a very expensive project that is totally unnecessary for homes on the hill side of Lake Shore Drive (as well as most homes on the lake side.) We have never had any problems with the septic system in the 15 years I have owned my home. 18 7/13/20 Linda Spt Long Beach Indiana United State! Not necessary for the majority of lakeside households 19 7/13/20 Claudia Ma Long Beach Indiana United State! When sewers were discussed a couple of years ago nobody like the system that was proposed. It seemed like it was prone to back ups. Why should all owners along Lakeshore Drive be burdened for the over-building of a few?The market values of those impacted properties have probably diminished due to high water, septic secondarily. Pump and ha appears to be a reasonable solution for the short term and not cost prohibitive for those owners. Why dona€rMt we purchase the lots for the benefit of all in Long Beach? 20 7/13/20 MICHAEL KO Long Beach Indiana United State! This is not the correct remedy 21 7/13/20 Laura Co1 Longbeach Indiana United States 22 7/13/20 Rose We Long Beach Indiana United State! The preservation and cleanliness of our freshwater Lake M ichigan is of utmost important and should be to everyone, especially those with improperly and unnecessarily built lake side houses. 23 7/13/20 T.J . Ne Long Beach Indiana United States 24 7/13/20 Thomas Kin Long Beach Indiana United States 25 7/13/20 Charles Laz Long Beach Indiana United State! I feel that everyone should not be dragged into a huge expense for a few non-compliant properties. Let them take care of their own problem. 26 7/13/20 Kim Ole Long Beach Indiana United State! Preservation of beachfront and roadways. 27 7/13/20 Judy Sd Long Beach Indiana United State: We are too hilly to ever put sewers in our area The people that over built (or their builder) should take responsibility and not burden the whole community This will effect sales in the long run - who wants by sign up for an on going assessment that will increase 28 7/13/20 Danny Ho: Long Beach Indiana United States 29 7/13/20 Kevin Lor Long Beach Indiana United State: This will only benefit lake front owners by increasing their property value. This will diminish the property value of all of Long Beach Homes with septic tanks away from the beach. STOP LETIING OUT OF STATE PROPERlY OWNERS DESTROY OUR COMMUNilY. They dona€'Mt care about Long Beach. They are just trying to improve their BEACH HOUSE in Indiana before they go back home for the winter. 30 7/13/20 Kathleen Klu Long Beach Indiana United States 31 7/13/20 Laura Brc Decatur Georgia United State: I grew up at stop 33 and my parents still live there. 32 7/13/20 Tim Ha 1Long Beach Indiana United State: The town council is going over board and not looking out for all residents, especially those on LSD. Those homes who are having septic issues need to pay for and correct their property septic issues. For the town council to say they are having a meeting yet the decision isy made and that the meeting is not to decide for sewers is 100% wrong! The council was voted to represent all re si dents and constituents of Long Beach. To mandate sewers are going to be put in without listening to residents is absolutely wrong! Listen to all and let the majority decide! 33 7/14/20 Elizabeth Gn Long Beach Indiana United State: Cost of proposed system which will only benefit owners of three homes 34 7/14/20 Sean Gn Long beach Indiana United States 35 7/14/20 Robert No Long Beach Indiana United States 36 7/14/20 Charles SolLongbeach Indiana United State: I am opposed to the sewer installation on Lake Shore Dr 37 7/14/20 Crystal Do Long Beach Indiana United State: Would rather have to replace a septic tank than take on an extraordinarily long term financial burden; notwithstanding endangering stability of existing utilities and roadway itself. 38 7/14/20 Margaret Alii Long Beach Indiana United State: Totally against the interests of most property owners affected. Unreasonably expensive for majority who neither need nor want a sewer project. 39 7/14/20 Mark and Ro Ber Long Beach Indiana United State: We have a 10-yr-old, fully functional septic system behind our hillside house, a good 100ft off LSD . The cost of running new lines and whatever else is required to get our waste matter uphill to the street is not known but will be substantial. The capital loan costs are approximate (You think they're going to go down? We don't.) and also su bstantial. We resent this expense being imposed upon us and are opposed to this project as proposed. We also do not wish to live through the aggravating disruption that will occur, especially during a pandemic when we are needing to stay home.
40 7/14/20 Penny Me Long Beach Indiana United States 41 7/14/20 Jacqueline Pei Brighton Illinois United States 42 7/14/20 June Sal Long Beach Indiana United State: We have a new septic system! 43 7/14/20 Stephen Brc McMurray Pennsylvania United State: I was a Long Beach Resident for over 20years. We have had high water before. It was almost this high in the early 70's. The difference now is the rise of me-mansions on lake shore drive with very large se ptic systems, many of which may not be in compliance with Long Beach ordinance. This community is almost 100 years old and has been on a septic system for all that time. Before any thing is done about a sewer system on Lake Shore drive, ensure that all lakeside homes are in compliance with local regulations rega rding septic systems. 44 7/14/20 Terri & Carl An• Long Beach Indiana United State: We live on the hillside of LSD and have no problems. If someone is having trouble they should be responsible for any repairs or changes that need to be done. It isn't fair to charge all residents of LSD . It is especially upsetting that the Town Council feels they have that much power over the rest of us that they can make this decision without our input. 45 7/16/20 James Na1Long Beach, I Indiana United State: There is/was no evidence of septic effects on water quality of the lake, the Health Dept. made no consideration of costs in banning septicsystem repair, the costs are stupefying, and costs for civic improvements in a community should be born by all of the citizens of a community. This is using a cannon to kill a gnat. 46 7/16/20 Kay Gr< Long Beach Indiana United States 47 7/16/20 Linda Hn Long Beach Indiana United States 48 7/16/20 Kevin Hn. Long Beach Indiana United States 49 7/16/20 Bert Car Long Beach Indiana United State: No confidence in this administration managing a project like this. I dona€rMt believe it is necessary as there are other options. la(TMd like to wait until there is a comprehensive sewer plan for the whole town. so 7/16/20 Mary Carol Lor Long Beach Indiana United States 51 7/19/20 John Me Long beach Indiana United State: I do NOT support city sewers for Long Beach . There is no technical evidence to support the project. The project funding is poorly developed from info released. 52 7/23/20 Carolyn Coc Long Beach Indiana United States 53 8/2/20 Thomas Ste Long Beach Indiana United States 54 8/2/20 Michelle Ste Long Beach Indiana United States 55 8/12/20 Mike Lar Michiana She Indiana United State: The majority of homeowners in Long Beach should not have to support or be inconvenienced, let alone the entire area, to appease and fix issues for a dozen homes that should never have been built. 56 8/13/20 Patrice Bur Long Beach Indiana United State ~ Not necessary for majority of LSD homes. proper building restrictions would have assured non-failure 57 8/13/20 Miriam Cle Long Beach Indiana United States 58 8/13/20 John BUI Long Beach Indiana United States 59 8/16/20 Mark and M< Me Long Beach Indiana United States 60 8/17/20 Thia Par Long Beach Indiana United State~ Why does it continue to pander to the loudest voices? So tired of hearing a€relf you donaCMt agree, 1will sue and do it anywaya€ . So sue us and get it over with. Youa€'Mre already the most disliked people on LSD. 61 8/19/20 William We Long Beach Indiana United State~ There is no proven need to have sewers. All that is needed is to allow home owners on the lake to maintain their seawalls and septic systems. The town councilaCMs multiple new laws and regulations have prevented this. Their actions are stupid if not sinister. Their restrictions were unnecessary. 62 8/19/20 Dalia We Long Beach Indiana United State~ IDEM inspected the water coming out from behind our seawall a few years ago . They told us it was cleaner than the water coming out of our tap. Repair the problems. Shut down offenders. Let homeowners repair their seawalls to protect their homes, their septic systems and Lake Shore Drive. Please do not force this totally unnecessary expense on the rest of us. 63 8/19/20 mark old long beach Indiana United States 64 8/19/20 Rosemary Sw Long Beach Indiana United State ~ Exorbitant costs continue to be imposed on lakefront owners. $23,000 in annual property taxes is more than enough to cover 65 8/19/20 Robert Car Long Beach Indiana United States 66 8/19/20 Edward syl' Long Beach Benin Not necessary 67 8/19/20 Chris Tor Long Beach Indiana United State~ Whole town should be on sewer if it is so necessary. 68 8/19/20 Laura Le< Long Beach Indiana United States 69 8/19/20 Stephanie Br~ Longbeach Indiana United States 70 8/19/20 Jen N Long Beach Indiana United States 71 8/19/20 Laurie Stir Elmhurst Illinois United State! The decision for a new sewer system is being forced down the throats of LSD homeowners based on lack of facts and in some cases wrong info. It has not been proven at all that enough sewers were compromised to cause this upheaval and HUGE costs on the back of the homeowners. The council once again is forcing itself on the homeowners and not showing any advocacy for its people and those who own homes on LSD. The council should be forced to talk fact and tell us the VERY low number of sewers compromised and let the facts guide the decision instead of ignorance with blinders on. 72 8/20/20 Mark Tor Long Beach Indiana United State! 1) Unnecessary, poor solution to a limited problem. 2) irresponsible timing: we are in the middle of a pandemic! 3) A few {Town council) overstepping by making a decision that affects many..... without hearing those harmed by their choices 73 8/20/20 Renee Kat Long Beach Indiana United State! My septic is so far from Lake shore Drive, that it could not impact anything near the Lake.
Also I would like to know how many cost proposals you have. Most people do not trust the council of Long beach 74 8/20/20 Richard Del Long beach Indiana United State! We do not need it. Our system works great! 75 8/20/20 Pamela Lar Long Beach Indiana United States 76 8/20/20 Daniel Dal Long Beach Indiana United States 77 8/20/20 Ella Sd Fishers Indiana United States 78 8/22/20 James k. Long Beach Indiana United State: I support the petition to stop the Long Beach Sewer System on Lake Shore Drive. If this is such a concern to the Board, then all Long Beach residents should contribute equally. Besides, as all long term residents know, the lake has cycles. Not so long ago it was at it's low point; now at it's a high point. Table this project and after the lake goes back down deal with those that have failed systems in another way designed specifically for their property and let those owner bear the cost . 79 8/22/20 Kathy Do· Long Beach Indiana United State: Unnecessary expense. No real Evidence of any pollution to Lake Michigan through septic systems currently in place. 80 8/24/20 Tim An1Long beach Indiana United States 81 8/24/20 Sue An1 Long Beach Indiana United States 82 8/24/20 Alison and T< Do Long Beach Indiana United States 83 8/24/20 annie rna Long Beach Indiana United State: I care about the future of Long Beach and our beach. 84 8/24/20 Judith Po1 Long Beach Indiana United State: I can not afford this. Why isn't the State of Indiana paying for it after all what are we paying ta xes for. 85 8/24/20 Carla Car Long Beach Indiana United State: Done in haste. Past Town council meetings do not inspire trust. Believe it should be town-wide not select few if the happens 86 8/24/20 Carter Ele LONG BEACH Indiana United State: Unjust financial impact forced on 290 homeowners over an issue impacting less than 5% of homeowners. Surely, there is a more cost-efficient solution that helps our neighbors address their problem without burdening everyone with the cost of a sewer installation that very few will connect to. 87 8/24/20 George Go Long beacn Indiana United States 88 8/24/20 Alan Kre Long Beach Indiana United States 89 8/25/20 Catherine ML Long Beach Indiana United States 90 8/25/20 Jerry Te ~ Long Beach Indiana United State: The issue I care most about that hasnaeMt been addressed is how much and how quickly the sewers will change Long Beach. Once sewers are in, EVERY 40' LOT ON LAKE SHORE DRIVE BECOMES BUILDABLE. Once a lot is deemed buildable, it is taxed by the county as such - with a much higher assessed value. The new property tax could easily be $20K per year, a cost that would force most lot owners to either build on it or sell it. Anyone buying the lot would be buying it with the intention of building a home on it. I think there is already too much development of new homes along the beach, but sewers will make it much much worse and permanently change our town. To prevent this, property taxes on currently unbuildable lots should continue at their current level even after sewers are installed; tax it as buildable when and if house construction begins. EMPLTY LOTS SHOULD BE GRANDFATHERED by the county so that people arena(•Mt forced to sell their lots just because sewers came through. 91 8/25/20 Joel SOl Long Beach Indiana United States 92 8/26/20 Sarah Ta~ Long Beach Indiana United States 93 8/26/20 Marjorie Fer Long Beach Indiana United State: Too costly and environmentally inferior to the current septic. 94 8/26/20 Cristi Fra Long Beach Indiana United State: this project is not worth the cost or inconvenience when we have longstanding properly functioning septic systems. There are bigger fish to fry in Long Beach like the ruined la kefront from the installation of seawalls and breached septic systems into the lake from lake shore drive. 95 8/26/20 Kevin 0'~ Long Beach Indiana United States 96 8/27/20 Dolores Bu1 Long Beach Indiana United States 97 8/27/20 Erinn C01 Long Beach Indiana United State: Cost! I already have sewer hook up and shouldna€'Mt pay fir the assessment 98 8/27/20 Joan Sm Long beach Indiana United States 99 8/27/20 Margaret Die long Beach Indiana United State! long Beach is one town therefore the cost should be split by the entire town and the entire town should go to the sewer system! You can start on LSD since 10 homes need it the most and it appears that will be the main pipe line to branch off to the rest of the town. One for all and all for one! Totally unfair to expect LSD to cover the cost when most people have perfectly fine working septic systems like the rest of long Beach! 100 8/31/20 Martin Co1Long Beach Indiana United States 101 8/31/20 Gary Ro1Long Beach Indiana United State! I am totally against this project. The 10 families should be allowed to repair or replace their septic systems, just like the Wall family was allowed to build a new house on the North side of LSD, last year, because the building permit had a "grandfathered in " septic. How is not a home with a septic, not "grandfathered" ???? With whatever the town is forcing the 10 homes to do to have their septic waste removed now, is certainly a lot cheaper that what it's going to cost to have sewers installed. As of last lear, the town of LB had not had a toxicology report of how the septic systems are affecting the lake. 102 9/2/20 Eric Ko; long Beach Indiana United State! It's crazy to charge owners on LSD regardless of if they hook up or not. This is a Town problem. Everyone benefits from septics not falling into beaches, whether or not the house is on the beach or not. Everyone in the town should have to pay for the benefit of clean beaches in our beach town I MO. Otherwise the project shouldn't break ground. If this is how we are going to handle payment of improvement projects in the TOWN, I want everything itemized. If I never use Moore road then I don't want to pay for it to be resurfaced. What logic!! Where does this end? 103 9/5/20 Patrick Ho,long Beach Indiana United States 104 9/8/20 Julie Het Long Beach Indiana United States 105 9/8/20 Edward Sm long beach Indiana United States 106 9/8/20 Charlene Mi1Long Beach Indiana United States 107 9/8/20 Michael KeE Long Beach Indiana United State: No input from the residents. 108 9/8/20 Joann Sot Longbeach Indiana United State: Dangerous to lake shore dr 109 9/8/20 Jerry Ele Long Beach Indiana United State: Who provides and pays for the maintenance of pumps and pipes in the system in future years? 110 9/9/20 Ellyn Lyr Long Beach Indiana United State: Do not have confidence in Town Boarda€™s decisions. Accurate cost of this project is key 111 9/9/20 Walter Co: Long Beach Indiana United States 112 9/9/20 Stephanos Riz long beach Indiana United State: I am against due to the financial burden. 113 9/9/20 Alain Le< Long Beach Indiana United State: I live on lake shore drive. I care about the community. I care about the environment. I care about a fair process. I. care about making a wise decision. I care about having elected officials fully representing their communities. 114 9/12/20 Donna Cis Long Beach Indiana United State: The expense shoud be divided among alii of Long Beach 115 9/12/20 Richard Dzi Long Beach Indiana United States 116 9/12/20 Christopher D'J! Long Beach Indiana United State: As a resident of Long Beach, who lives on the south/upland side of Lake Shore Drive, I am opposed to being required to connect my home to a wastewater/sewer line contemplated under Lake Shore Drive as I currently have a completely adequate and functioning septic system that more than meets the demands of my home. One of the factors in deciding to purchase this home, was the fact that there was an adequate septic system and, therefore, no additional costs (other than pumping) associated with payments for sewer/wastewater. The single factor driving the contemplated construction of this sewer line is that a number of homes on the north/beachside of I Lake Shore Drive have inadequate septics for the size of their usage (because they increased the size of the residence substantially from what existed, often times in violation of existing zoning/building codes) or failed to maintain their septic systems or had their septics situates in an area subject to erosion as a result of wave action. To now require that ALL homeowners on Lake Shore Drive, including those that have perfectly functioning septics, at a tremendous cost which could exceed tens of thousands of dollars for each home, is an unfair and unconstitutional taking of property rights in violation of both state and federal constitutions. It is acknowledged that the only reason that this sewer system is being planned is because of the failure of a number of septic systems on the north/beachside of Lake Shore Drive. If lake levels are going to continue to rise, and there exists a concern that more 117 9/13/20 Amy D'P Long Beach Indiana United State: I own a home on the side of LSD with a perfectly fine septic and do not understand why I would have to pay the cost to run sewer lines when I have to interest in hooking up to a sewer. 118 9/13/20 James and R< Bul Long Beach Indiana United State: I can't believe that the needs of a few Lakeshore Drive residents are impactiing dozens and dozens of other owners! I am a senior citizen with a perfectly functioniing septic. It is likely I will have to sell rather than accept this heavy financial burden. PLEASE RECONSIDER. 119 9/15/20 Karen Silt Long Beach Indiana United States 120 9/15/20 Michael Ro: Long Beach Indiana United State: We are a community/town, when the building permits were approved it was as a town, now that we have a sewer problem on LSD the property owners are being singled out to solve a town problem that should never have been created. Share the cost with the town, do not penalize those of us on LSD that purchased property on LSD. Michael Kuss
From: Abigail
I would like to express my concerns that the Long Beach Town Council has passed an ordinance that Lake Shore Drive is in peril at the previous Special Town Council meeting. On Monday, September 14th Town Council Meeting they authorized $750,000 for emergency repairs to LSD in Long Beach . It seems negligent and hazardous to proceed with sewers on Lake Shore Drive and I am against this project.
Abigail Neary
On Aug 26, 2020, at 2:42 PM, Abigail
To Whom it May Concern-
I am a long-time resident of Long Beach and I am opposed to the installation of sewers along Lake Shore Drive. The Long Beach Town Council did not follow a transparent governance process. Pertinent information has not been shared with citizens even with a FOIA request. They have not received solid bids and have given a blank check. It is not appropriate to place an additional financial burden on all residents of Lake Shore Drive when 10 homes have an issue. Those homeowners should pay for repair of their own properties.
In addition, the Town Council has indicated this is an environmental issue. According to IDEM records ecoli levels in Long Beach have not exceeded the acceptable level to date this year.
I urge you to stop this project until a fully comprehensive and transparent plan is put in place. As of today 94 residents have signed a petition against this project you can find it here: https://www.thepetitionsite.com/ 290/ 988/ 100/ voice-your-concern-for-long-beach sewer-syst em/
Thank you Abigail Neary
1 Michael Kuss
From: Abigail
Please listen starting at 27 minutes from the special Town Council meeting on 6/30. It references the emergency actions on LSD by the Long Beach Town Council. Minutes and video have not been posted from the 9/14 meeting where this was discussed further and $750,000 authorized.
Thank you-
Abigail Neary
On Sep 16, 2020, at 11:25 AM, Abigail
I would like to express my concerns that the Long Beach Town Council has passed an ordinance that Lake Shore Drive is in peril at the previous Special Town Council meeting. On Monday, September 14th Town Council Meeting they authorized $750,000 for emergency repairs to LSD in Long Beach . It seems negligent and hazardous to proceed with sewers on Lake Shore Drive and I am against this project.
Abigail Neary
On Aug 26, 2020, at 2:42PM, Abigail
To Whom it May Concern-
I am a long-time resident of Long Beach and I am opposed to the installation of sewers along Lake Shore Drive. The Long Beach Town Council did not follow a transparent governance process. Pertinent information has not been shared with citizens even with a FOIA request. They have not received solid bids and have given a blank check. It is not appropriate to place an additional financial burden on all residents of Lake Shore Drive when 10 homes have an issue. Those homeowners should pay for repair of their own properties.
In addition, the Town Council has indicated this is an environmental issue. According to IDEM records ecoli levels in Long Beach have not exceeded the acceptable level to date this year.
I urge you to stop this project until a fully comprehensive and transparent plan is put in place. As of today 94 residents have signed a petition against this project you can find it here: https://w w w .thepetitionsite.com/ 290/ 988/ 100/ voice-your concern-for-long-beach-sewer-system/
1 Thank you Abigail Neary
2 Attachment No. 3 Responses to Written Questions and Comments
A. The following responses are presented to questions and comments that were contained in one or more e-mails that were received before the public hearing: A.1 The purpose of the proposed LSD sanitary sewer project is to provide an acceptable solution to the permanent moratorium enacted by the LaPorte County Health Department on October 24, 2017 which applies to the existing septic systems of all 150 properties on the north side of LSD, for its entire length in the Town of Long Beach. The only solution for the moratorium is a sanitary sewer for the entire length of LSD in Long Beach. The proposed sanitary sewer will eliminate the existing septic tank pump and haul procedures for 10-12 residences and many additional residences on the north side of LSD in the future, as their septic systems fail. Pumping and hauling septic tanks is a temporary measure only and is not an acceptable permanent solution to the septic system moratorium.
A.2 If and when a sanitary sewer system is constructed for the entire Town of Long Beach, the existing LSD residents’ monthly sewer rates on LSD can be adjusted to match the new sewer user rates for the entire town. A.3 All or a portion of the cost of street pavement removal and replacement for the proposed LSD sanitary sewer project could be funded separately by the Town rather than by the residents on LSD, provided the Town has sufficient funds at the time the sanitary sewer project financing is finalized, after construction bids are received. A.4 Any project grants that can be obtained and secured prior to finalizing the project financing, would reduce the project loan amount and the resulting LSD residents’ monthly costs. Presently no sources of project grants are known but further investigation can be made. A.5 The LSD residents’ monthly sewer bills for the proposed sanitary sewer would include (a) a fixed amount for debt service for project loan repayment and (b) a sewer user fee composed of a base fee based on the size of the water meter plus a treatment charge based on the amount of water usage. There is no property assessment cost included in the sewer bills. When a residence is sold, the monthly sewer bills would be sent to the new owner. The previous owner would only be responsible for any unpaid sewer bills accruing prior to the time of sale. A.6 A public hearing at the completion of the preliminary engineering report, for a project to be financed by a low interest loan from the State Revolving Fund, is the required method of presenting the project details to the project
1 participants and other interested parties. The public hearing results are included in the preliminary engineering report and submitted to the SRF Section officials for their review and decision regarding awarding a low interest loan for the project, or not. A.7 The Agreement mentioned and included as Exhibit 12 in the preliminary engineering report between the Michigan City Sanitary District (MCSD) and the Town of Long Beach for the proposed LSD sanitary sewer project is unsigned but it has been approved by resolution of the MCSD Commissioners. The Agreement concerns the project responsibilities and authorities of each public entity. The Agreement does not include the details of the project. For project details, the preliminary engineering report for the project should be reviewed. These details include the locations and details of the proposed sanitary sewer facilities, itemizations of the construction quantities and estimated costs, construction contingencies, and associated project costs, estimated monthly sewer bills for the LSD residents and an anticipated project implementation schedule. Furthermore, the itemized construction quantities will be included in the construction bidding documents and in the construction contract with the successful bidder, to assure proper payment for all required project construction and nothing more. A.8 Each private property owner is responsible to plan, construct, operate, and maintain the facilities on their property for connection to the sanitary sewer lateral stub at their property line. The private property owner costs are included in the preliminary engineering report as follows: (1) for a 6” gravity sanitary sewer; a capital cost range of $5,000 - $7,500 with no annual O&M costs and (2) for a submersible grinder pump, with a 1 h.p. submersible motor, underground tank, 2-3 ft. in diameter and 4-6 ft. high and 1-1/4” pressure service line; a capital cost range of $7,500 - $10,000 with an estimated annual O&M cost of $100/yr. These capital cost ranges are the result of the differences in private properties and whether or not the sanitary sewer in a residence is rerouted thru a different basement or foundation wall to accommodate the connection to the sanitary lateral sewer stub at the property line. Each property owner will be able to designate the exact location of the sanitary sewer lateral connection at their property line.
A.9 All residents on LSD would be required to pay the estimated monthly debt service cost of $127.76/mo. for the proposed sanitary sewer project but only those LSD residents who connect to the sanitary sewer would be required to also pay the estimated monthly sewer usage fee of $37.29/mo. There is no sewer connection charge included in the project financing. If few people connect to the sanitary sewer, an increasing sewer connection fee could be established to encourage people to connect to the sanitary sewer or the
2 State law regarding connecting to sanitary sewers might be imposed. Regardless of how many connect to the proposed sanitary sewer, the sewer and the three associated lift stations and force mains will function, possibly with more maintenance and flushing required if fewer connect. B. The following responses to questions and comments that were contained in one or more e-mails that were received during or after the public hearing: B.1 It was decided to provide a sanitary sewer lateral stub for every residence on each side of LSD, for its entire length in the Town of Long Beach for the following reasons: (a) the sanitary sewer would extend the entire length of LSD due to the septic system moratorium for all of the residences on the north side of LSD, (b) constructing all sanitary lateral stubs as part of the sanitary sewer construction is cost-effective and eliminates the need for future sanitary lateral construction on LSD and the required “street cuts”, (c) this is a public health project, for the protection of Lake Michigan and everyone who can be served by the project is expected to participate and pay for and use the project facilities. This is the standard procedure for a public sanitary sewer project. B.2 Connecting to the sanitary sewer on LSD will result in the residential wastewater receiving the following treatment at the MCSD wastewater treatment plant: screening, primary settling, aeration for bacterial decomposition of organic matter and conversion of ammonia to nitrate, secondary settling, sand filtration, chlorination, dechlorination and final aeration before discharge into Trail Creek. This degree of treatment is continuous, year round. Furthermore, the MCSD has improved their sanitary sewer system over many years to reduce the system overflows to just one location, the overflow of a 7 million gallon detention basin at their wastewater treatment plant, which only occurs on an average of once per year. B.3 Regarding the long-term sustainability of a sanitary sewer on LSD, the operation, maintenance, repairs and replacement of the sewer would be the responsibility of the MCSD, making the sewer’s sustainability unlimited. B.4 The proposed sanitary sewer on LSD would have a capacity for all the existing residences on LSD and new houses on the few vacant lots on LSD. Including the vacant lots in the sanitary sewer capacity does not change the sanitary sewer sizes or costs or the lift station pump sizes and costs. B.5 Regarding vacant lots on LSD, no vacant lots have been included in the project financing analysis. Furthermore, no vacant lots would receive a sanitary sewer lateral stub unless the property owner requests a lateral stub and agrees to pay the monthly debt service cost for project loan repayment.
3 B.6 The Town of Long Beach Water Department officials are planning to include the replacement of 130 existing water service lines on LSD in the new sanitary sewer construction contract and pay the estimated total cost of $350,000 from Water Department funds. B.7 Installation of a sanitary sewer on LSD is not a risk because of future damage to LSD from Lake Michigan storms, even at the present historic high water levels of the lake. The entire length of LSD in the Town of Long Beach is sufficiently above the present water level of Lake Michigan to be safe from Lake Michigan storms, provided all exposed embankments of LSD are protected by seawalls or rip-rap. B.8 The proposed sanitary sewer on LSD will not be the main sewer for a future sanitary sewer system for the entire Town of Long Beach. The LSD sanitary sewer flow will be the same initially, when serving LSD residences only and in the future when it would also serve some additional residences south of LSD. To accomplish this, the discharge of the west lift station on LSD would be directed from LSD and into a future sanitary sewer on Monrovia Drive. As a result, 35% of the future flow from a sanitary sewer system for the entire Town would be from LSD, 18% would be from Mount Clare Way, and 47% would be from Chastleton Drive/Karwick Road.
Prepared By: Haas & Associates, LLC Date: September 24, 2020
4 Attachement 4 Question/Comment Report - Questions/Comments made During Public Hearing and Answers
Topic Webinar ID Actual Start Time Actual Duration (minutes) # Questions/Comments Long Beach Sewers Public Hearing 9/9/2020 17:03 157 67 Question Details Person(s) # Question Asker Name Asker Email Answer(s) Answering Yes, there will be a recording of Can we have access to the the meetinE7:E61g avaibale on 1 William Becht [email protected] Michael Kuss recording of this meeting? the MCSD website.
A link to the Preliminary Engineering Report was provided in the Public Hearing Announcement.
The report can also be viewed in These documents are impossible the Sanitary District’s to read. Will they be available in Administration Building at 1100 2 Beth Linnen [email protected] Michael Kuss printed copies? Where can they E. Eighth Street during normal be viewed? working hours. They are avaialble on line. The link address was provided in the Public Hearing Notice. http://www.mcsan.org/LongBea chPER
Was there a mention of possible No, Haas & Associates, LLC did underground power poles not consider possible 3 Jeff Brunner [email protected] Jim Maurer included? Makes it more paletable underground power poles. to south side homeowners. Do the lift stations create any There is a very low noise level on 4 Mike Ross [email protected] Michael Kuss noise level concerns? the lift stations. The memo for the public hearing The Public Announcement for was sent out yesterday Tuesday this hearing was made in August 5 September 8th by the town, not Dr Rizos [email protected] Michael Kuss 2020 giving enough time to formulate questions. This is an open question with no answer currently. However, due Will LSD property owners be to the number of homeowners indemnified for the future that would be connecting, it is 6 Mike Ross [email protected] Karl Cender expansion costs to the balance of possible that the rates may be the Town of LB? lower by having a combined rate.
The area between the edge of Will LSD paving include the service the pavement and the property 7 areas up to the retaining walls of Mike Ross [email protected] lines will be put back to match Jim Maurer the LSD properties? what is existing.
It is for all developable lots and Is the monthly cost based on the owner would be responsible properties that have a residence or 8 Gregg Hansen [email protected] for the debt service fee only. Karl Cender do those costs apply to undeveloped lots with no hookup?
Mr. Cender replied: To finance First I am not in favor of this the project, both north and project, second question is the south side of Lakeshore Drive following, since this is a north of residents will be required to pay lake shore drive issue why is the the capital portion of the burden placed on the southside of project. Karl Cender; 9 lake shore drive residents, if that is Dr Rizos [email protected] Attorney Meyer replied: The Attorney James the case out an altruistic approach, agreement says it is only Meyer then all of long beach should be required that current resident part of this. i do not believe that customers be required to pay southsiders should not be held the capital portion of the financially accountable for this. project.. Comment was made, no since the town has given permits question was asked for homes to be built, then the 10 town should be able to give the Dr Rizos [email protected] N/A residents permits to correct their systems.
Do you have a cost estimate for Haas & Associates, LLC has an the 130 potable water line estimate that can be provided in 11 John Troller [email protected] Jim Maurer replacements that you recommend the written summary. need replacing? Jim Maurer replied: There are other properties on Lakeshore Drive that would be within 300 feet of the main sewer line. However, Haas & Associates, LLC How was the decision to apply does not want Sanitary Laterals installation costs only to running long distance along side residences on Lake Shore Drive streets. The Sewer must be in Jim Maurer; when Indiana State Law allows front of the house to provide a 12 Gregg Hansen [email protected] Attorney James municipalities to require sanitary sewer lateral. Attorney Meyer properties within 300 feet of the Meyer replied: It was requested main sewer line be required to by the Council of the Town of hook up to the sewer system. Long Beach that the Sanitary District not implement the 300 feet mandate.
By the way i live at 2915 lake shore Comment was made, no 13 Dr Rizos [email protected] N/A drive. question was asked Comment was made, no I am satisfied with the due question was asked 14 diligence performed...I support the Dave Miniat [email protected] N/A project. Dave Miniat Karl Cender replied: It would be up to the town of Long Beach Council to determine if there would be a connection fee and prior capital expenses for new residents connecting to the what is going to happen in future, sanitary sewer. Attorney Meyer when other streets are linked, replied: A determination would each steet residents are going to Karl Cender; need to be made at the time the 15 pay for their construction plus Zafar Rizvi [email protected] Attorney James situation arose. Residents could connection fee and capital Meyer either pay the same amount to expenses for Lake Shore road pay the loan out faster. Or the project? amount could be reduced, charging everybody and pay the loan off at the same rate
Given that Lsd is on sand who will The Contractor would be liable pay for any cracks or damage to for damage, if it can be proved 16 the foundations of our home. I terribrady [email protected] that it was done by their Jim Maurer have heard that the construction company. company will not be liable. Moore Road will have the east lift station installed and intersection revisions will be made. There will also be a force What construction is expected on main running southbound on Moore Rd? Will it also be 17 Joe [email protected] Moore Road for several hundred Jim Maurer discontinued during the summer feet to existing sanitary sewer season? manholes. Construction will not take place on Moore Road in the summer season. Comment was made, no I would be happy to provide an question was asked 18 update petition copy - now with Abigail Neary [email protected] N/A 113 signatures against this project
If it a larger home with more bathrooms and water facilities it will be more than the 700 Cubic What constitutes an average sized Feet of Service. The 700 feet is 19 house that would be using 700 T.J. [email protected] Karl Cender an average of what a typical cubic feet of service? resident of Michigan City would use.
There are approximately 150 homes on the southside of Do you know how many homes are Lakeshore Drive. Haas & south of Lake Shore Drive? What Associates, LLC did not estimate 20 John Troller [email protected] Jim Maurer would the cost be for all of Long the cost for installing sanitary Beach residents? sewer through the entire Town of Long Beach.
Karl Cender replied: There will be no upfront cost, only monthly fees. However, each to clarify, is there an upfront cost homeowner will be responsible Karl Cender; Anonymous 21 or will entire cost be financed and from the property line to their Attorney Attendee there will only be monthly fees home. Attorney Meyer replied: Meyer There is a sewer connection fee in the amount of $500.00 There is no alternative to pump For the affected homes- why are and haul other than installing a there no alternatives to pump and sewer system 22 haul? Many of the affected homes Abigail Neary [email protected] Michael Kuss have very large driveways/yards on the south of their property.
There’s very little Federal Have we exausted all financial funding anymore. The Town of contributions that might be Long Beach has looked and may available from Federal to help continue to investigate the 23 maintain cleanliness and purity of William Becht [email protected] funding of this project. Michael Kuss Lake Michigan? Any other monies that may be tapped for this project?
This decision was made by the Why is the Lake Shore Drive Town of Long Beach Council that residents the only ones paying for Lakeshore Drive residents pay this project when in the near for this project. This decision 24 judithpower [email protected] Michael Kuss future all of Long Beach residents was made because those will be using what we paid for. I residents will be the ones am against this project. receiving the benefits. Michael Kuss replied: I am not aware of any available Grant funding for this project. It is something that can be investigated. Karl Cender replied: Cender & Company did explore whether the State of Has there been exploration on Indiana had any available Grants Michael Kuss; 25 grants to assist with costs of this Abigail Neary [email protected] for this project out of the State Karl Cender project? Revolving Fund (SRF) Program. It was determined that this project would not be eligible for any type of State Grants due to the high-income level.
Are their grants available for a See answer #25 Anonymous 26 portion of these costs? Lb did not N/A Attendee research this. Comment was made, no The project includes repaving LSD. question was asked The possibility of waterline improvement is also being researched. These two 27 improvements will benefit the J. Burke [email protected] N/A entire town. It seems that the repaving and possible water line upgrade costs should not be the sole responsibility of LSD residents. Attorney Meyer replied: It would be up to the Town of Long Beach Council. There is no legal requirement for the Town of Attorney James Why is there no referrendum for Long Beach residents to vote. Meyer; all of the lake shore drive residents Christopher L. Willoughby 28 Dr Rizos [email protected] Attorney to vote whether there is a simple replied: I agree with Attorney Christopher L. majority for or against this? Meyer, it would be based on the Willoughby restrictions and prohibitions put in place by the County.
This is a local problem that needs to be solved locally. The Why isn’t the cost of this project 29 judithpower [email protected] State of Indiana does not Michael Kuss put on the State of Indiana? provide sewers for residents of the state. Construction can begin in late Spring of 2021 if everything proceeds smoothly from this Can you give the construction 30 Jeff Brunner [email protected] point on. It would continue Jim Maurer dates again? through the Spring of 2022 except for the summer seasons.
Attorney Meyer replied: The homeowners need to have their Who would be doing the own private lateral line installed. Attorney connections to homes on LSD, right Michael Kuss replied: I believe 31 brock327 [email protected] Meyer; now many contractors dont want there will be plenty of Michael Kuss to work in LB contractors willing to install private laterals for the residents. Comment was made, no What about lot frontage question was asked differences on LSD. The local 32 Linda Gorman [email protected] N/A capital charge should be assessed based on frontage length.
Michael Kuss replied: This What seems to be mentioned question can be addressed in the consistently is about the 10 or so written comments. Jim Maurer pump and go homes. What is not agreed. being included are the homeowners on the North Side of LSD or those homes on the south side who sit closer than 200’ to lake MI who might like to erect a Anonymous Michael Kuss; 33 new home on their property. With Attendee Jim Maurer a septic moratorium if sewers aren’t brought to LB then what happens to those properties. How will the town then assist their residents. Will the council be going back to the LP county Health dept and ask for the septic moratorium to be lifted? Who is paying for the repaving of This is something the Town of LSD? Clearly this is a benefit for all Long Beach would have to 34 of the town. Why not install 568914 [email protected] Michael Kuss consider. sewers for the entire town at the same time? I do not recall stating that this Mr Mauerer stated that this system will benefit Michigan City system will benefit Michigan City with helping extra heavy flow with helping extra heavy flow during the summer months. 35 judithpower [email protected] Jim Maurer during the summer months, why arent michigan city residents being charged for this system
The Sanitary District can provide again, who would homeowners a list of local contractors that use, can we get some names of 36 brock327 [email protected] work in Michigan City, Indiana. Michael Kuss companies, this seems pretty specialized
No, this is a user fee not a tax Do all LSD residents have tax write- 37 offs since we would be paying off a Sharon Goodman [email protected] Karl Cender capital improvement loan?
There is only a monthly cost for when one person asked if the only the sewer use fee and for the cost is the monthly charge and you capitalization. He home will 38 answered yes—what about the terribrady [email protected] need to connetc their lateral. Michael Kuss installation fee? I heard that could There will be a costto connect. be 10000-20000 or more See answer #12 This is a large project, why don't you look at the cost for all of Long Beach residents? I have heard that old septic systems are being 39 John Troller [email protected] N/A required to be updated and replaced when a property is sold. It would benefit everyone to be able to hook up to the sewer system.
Comment was made, no since there are around 300 homes question was asked that this will afect and only 3% 40 have problem it doesn How many members of the town No audible answr 41 568914 [email protected] Michael Kuss council live on LSD? They can choose to stay on their septic system. However, those that do, will still be required to Why cant residents choose to have pay the debt service for the the sewer or septic. With the 42 judithpower [email protected] sanitary sewer. The only way to Jim Maurer moretorium enacted you are arrange financing for the project forcing residents into this project is knowing how many people will pay. It will vary between 6 to 8 feet How wide and deep will the trench wide and 8 to 15 feet deep 43 Joe [email protected] Jim Maurer be under Lakeshore Drive? depending on location. See answer #12 Why is it “necessary” for those on the south side of LSD to hook into 44 this system but not necessaryfor Sharon Goodman [email protected] N/A any of the homes directly behind us? No, it is sized for the Lakeshore Is there an additional cost relating Drive residents only. It is to the design of the project to designed for peak sewage allow for addiitonal usage by the generation days such as busy balance fo the LB should the Town summer weekends. 45 elect to sewer the entire Town? edgausselin [email protected] Jim Maurer Simply put, is the system oversized or overdesigned at additional cost to allow for future benefit for hte whole town Comment was made, no Comment, the Town Council question was asked should consider that all lots on Lake Shore Drive pay the debt 46 Joann Balous [email protected] N/A sewer charge. The lot may not be buildable now but with the sewers, that would most likely change. All the residents with failing septic systems on the north side jim maurer just stated we can keep of Lakeshore Drive are required are sewer is that true for the Attorney 47 markoldis [email protected] to connect to the sanitary sewer. people living on the north side of Meyer lsd and just pay the capital cost Comment was made, no I wish that the people who have question was asked non-functioning septics would 48 come to these meetings and make Martha Maust [email protected] N/A a case for the sewer. I'd like to hear their ideas and options. No, but it is something to has the town attempted to consider. 49 negotiate to get LSD owners a brock327 [email protected] Robert Lemay break with hooking into system Jim Maurer replied: The final Survey results of the North and South sides of Lakeshore Drive revealed 116 out of 175 customers were in favor of the sanitary sewer. This survey was received December 8, 2018. The survey sent to all residents of Michael Kuss replied: Regarding LSD, proved that the majority of the drinking water concerns, a the South side of LSD and the sanitary sewer is going to be North side of LSD do not want this better than a septic system Jim Maurer; 50 no sewers [email protected] sewer. Why would a sewer be which leaches into the ground Michael Kuss installed so close to our drinking water and out to Lake Michigan. water? Did you know that LSD is in There are requirements set in danger of being flooded? place by the State of Indiana which indicate mandatory sewer separation. I am not aware of Lakeshore Drive being in danger of flooding. Jim Maurer replied: The reasons for opposing would be stated and submitted in the Public Hearing section of the report. It will be reviewed by the State Revolving Fund (SRF) officials to can you please repeat what the determine if they will fund the steps are going forward and the Jim Maurer; 51 terribrady [email protected] project. Michael Kuss replied: procedure if we wish to state Michael Kuss The Town of Long Beach could opposition seek alternative means to fund the project if SRF officials decide no to fund the project. See answer #50 The survey sent to all residents of LSD, proved that the majority of the South side of LSD and the North side of LSD do not want this 52 no sewers [email protected] N/A sewer. Why would a sewer be installed so close to our drinking water? Did you know that LSD is in danger of being flooded? Haas & Associates, LLC did Did the Haas engagement require explore the Surface Haas to explore the Surface Transportation Bock Grand Transportation Block Grant Program. It is never too late to 53 edgausselin [email protected] Jim Maurer Program to seek 75% matching seek alternate funding funds from the State and Fed Gov’t opportunities for the street for the replacement of LSD portion of the project. Comment was made, no to be clear. with respect to question was asked potential damages to existing homes, the burden of proof would be on the homeowners. in other 54 words, they will need to show Tom King [email protected] N/A pictures of their foundations, or plasterwork, etc without damage to evidence it did not exist prior to construction? No, that’s private property. Haas & Associates, LLC avoided at Moore drive shoreland hill just because of cost. The pressure bought the last lot on lsd thet are sewer system does not need 55 only useing the beach cant you markoldis [email protected] Jim Maurer private property for lift stations. move the pumping station to that location to get it out of the street It was considerably less for two (2) reasons. 1. Haas & Associates, LLC had not yet determined the cost for the Sanitary District facility improvements. That cost was not included. 2. Haas decided that they had to construct this At the time of the survey, what Anonymous project in segments on 56 was the estimated cost of the Jim Maurer Attendee Lakeshore Drive to minimize the project? amount of Lakeshore Drive that would be under construction at one time. This is a more expensive way to consturct, but LSD is so important to the Town that this was appropriate. N/A Since the survey is from 2018 and there is a large turn over of LSD residents, is there consideration for a re-survey? Also, there 57 Linda Hnatusko [email protected] N/A appeasrs to be a large lack of communications and responses, can a registered letter be sent with a re-survey? N/A Did the survey that was sent out in 58 2018 have the cost associated with judithpower [email protected] N/A the project on the survey? The financial arrangements are not finalized until the Bids are in. The financing can be revised. If What happens if there are large Tim Anderson 2961 the Bid is not way over, the 59 [email protected] Jim Maurer cost over runs? Lake Shore Drive Sanitary District would want to consider revising the design and rebidding the project. N/A Since the survey is from 2018 and there is a large turn over of LSD residents, is there consideration for a re-survey? Also, there appeasrs to be a large lack of 60 communications and responses, Linda Hnatusko [email protected] N/A can a registered letter be sent with a re-survey? Can a registered letter notifying of the project and a new resident survey be sent? It will be the same width. Will Lake Shore Dr be widened 61 David Gunderson [email protected] Jim Maurer when it is redone? So we would not be able to hook By Spring 2022 all mentioned up until the entire project is Anonymous Long Beach Residents should be 62 Jim Maurer completed in 2023? Or will some Attendee able to connect. parts be usable? NA So there will be zero new Tim Anderson 2961 63 [email protected] connections to this LSD sewer? Lake Shore Drive It is going to look like an area of 25 feet by 10 feet in dimension and it will be enclosed inside of a What will the proposed west Lift 64 Tim Arendt 6-foot-high privacy/security Jim Maurer Station look like on the vacant lot? fence. A short retaining wall will need to be built because there is a steep slope on that property. Karl Cender replied: Those other areas are not part of the project.; Attorney Meyer Why do residents on Lakeshore replied: In the future, sewer may Drive have to bear the entire cost be installed there but they will Karl Cender; of this main sewer line going down not be added burden to 65 Tim Arendt Attorney Lakeshore Drive when so many Lakeshore Drive because the Meyer other residents can connect in the furthest west Lift Station will be future? directed to the south, taking capacity off of the sewer to the east so that additional capacity could be added. Lakeshore Drive is not in Peril on 6/29 the LB TC passed an now and the Town of Long ordinance to explore emergency Beach wants to make sure that 66 repair to LSD and then submit to Abigail Neary does not happen. Robert Lemay the BZA. Why would we put a sewer down a road in peril? Comment was made, no I'm not sure how much its going to question was asked cost me to hook up. I have a hous 67 ewith a great septic system. I'm Tony N/A diapointed that this decision was made without a referendum.